Re: OT: sliding away?
I'd love to see them. My daughter is on the synchronized skating team at Michigan State. Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > My daughter is on a synchronized skating team and I have great fun using > photoshop to create types of collages for the team's website. I take about a > half dozen photos of the team, individuals whatever and create an 8X10. Some > of the images are close cropped, others have shadows etc etc. They are very > effective. A similar idea can be done with any subject. Your kids, a family > vacation, your pets ... It's even a nice way to set up a portfolio. I'll put > a few on my Website if anyone is interested... > Vic > > In a message dated 11/12/02 8:40:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > << PhotoShop is fun, and the more you play, the more you learn. > Paul Stenquist > >>
Re: OT: sliding away?
My daughter is on a synchronized skating team and I have great fun using photoshop to create types of collages for the team's website. I take about a half dozen photos of the team, individuals whatever and create an 8X10. Some of the images are close cropped, others have shadows etc etc. They are very effective. A similar idea can be done with any subject. Your kids, a family vacation, your pets ... It's even a nice way to set up a portfolio. I'll put a few on my Website if anyone is interested... Vic In a message dated 11/12/02 8:40:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << PhotoShop is fun, and the more you play, the more you learn. Paul Stenquist >>
Re: OT: sliding away?
To me, the most valuable features of PhotoShop are those that allow fine tuning of a scan for printing. I usually begin by setting the "Levels." I set RGB level in respect to the histogram but frequently set the color levels by eye. "Hue and Saturation" is next. I'll adjust the overall colorcast a bit and work on the individual colors if necessary. I can generally apply a bit more saturation to my scans, but I have to be careful not to overdo it. The lightness control can also be effective if the scan looks a bit heavy or light. If I don't like the contrast, I'll tweak the RGB some more in "Curves." I also use Curves to reduce a color that seems too dominant. I sometimes reduce shadows or overly dominant midtones with the "Dodge" tool. Less frequently, I'll burn in some midtones with the "Burn" tool. I've tried burning in highlites, but it just seems to gray them off. However, a little is sometimes effective. Dodging highlites is very effective if they're not bright enough. Sometimes, I find I want to adjust the mix of a specific color, for that I go to "Selective Color." I've found, for example, that one can enrichen reds by adding a bit of black to them. Adding black to black can create a crisper overall look without affecting highlites or midtones. Adding or subtracting color to neutrals can help control an unwanted reflection or unnatural lighting. PhotoShop is fun, and the more you play, the more you learn. Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In a message dated 11/11/02 8:13:20 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > << LIke what? I'm curious what I should continue to teach myself. >> > > Try working with Layers to create soft focus effects on a picture that was > never taken that way. Try combining one image with another to create a whole > new photograph. > Try converting colour photographs to black and white and then using photoshop > to colourize the photo for a hand painted effect. Play with some of the > filters. If used properly they can add a nice touch to many photos > Try scanning in older images that were excellent but had one or two probelms. > Fix the problems and you now have the photo you always wanted. I did this > with a couple of fox photos I took at twilight with a flash. Some of the fox > shots exhibited green eye. They were excellent accept for the green "flash" > eyes. I fixed that and they are great shots.. > The list goes on > Vic
Re: OT: sliding away?
In a message dated 11/12/02 12:15:43 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Good tips Vic. I hope to have the time this winter to work not only on PS skills but scanning epson 2450 skills. Now if we could only get "Mel Lastman' snow to close the city like in 1999,it would help to get my but off the couch so t speak.:) Dave >> Here's a few things and some ideas I've done with photoshop and another program called painter http://hometown.aol.ca/pentxuser/digital.html Vic
Re: Re: OT: sliding away?
Good tips Vic. I hope to have the time this winter to work not only on PS skills but scanning epson 2450 skills. Now if we could only get "Mel Lastman' snow to close the city like in 1999,it would help to get my but off the couch so t speak.:) Dave Begin Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 12:05:35 EST To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: sliding away? In a message dated 11/11/02 8:13:20 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << LIke what? I'm curious what I should continue to teach myself. >> Try working with Layers to create soft focus effects on a picture that was never taken that way. Try combining one image with another to create a whole new photograph. Try converting colour photographs to black and white and then using photoshop to colourize the photo for a hand painted effect. Play with some of the filters. If used properly they can add a nice touch to many photos Try scanning in older images that were excellent but had one or two probelms. Fix the problems and you now have the photo you always wanted. I did this with a couple of fox photos I took at twilight with a flash. Some of the fox shots exhibited green eye. They were excellent accept for the green "flash" eyes. I fixed that and they are great shots.. The list goes on Vic End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: OT: sliding away?
In a message dated 11/11/02 8:13:20 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << LIke what? I'm curious what I should continue to teach myself. >> Try working with Layers to create soft focus effects on a picture that was never taken that way. Try combining one image with another to create a whole new photograph. Try converting colour photographs to black and white and then using photoshop to colourize the photo for a hand painted effect. Play with some of the filters. If used properly they can add a nice touch to many photos Try scanning in older images that were excellent but had one or two probelms. Fix the problems and you now have the photo you always wanted. I did this with a couple of fox photos I took at twilight with a flash. Some of the fox shots exhibited green eye. They were excellent accept for the green "flash" eyes. I fixed that and they are great shots.. The list goes on Vic
Re: Re: OT: sliding away?
gfrn and vic typed > Begin Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mon, 11 Nov 2002 17:38:16 EST To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: OT: sliding away? In a message dated 11/11/02 10:05:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << I've never bother to do anything of note in it, until recently.. The last few times I've turned the PC on, I've learned how to use curves and levels to make a nicer looking image, and how to clone out dust. Then I learned how to correctly resize images and DPI for printing. Is there more to photoshop? Oh yeah. Do I need to learn it? Nope. I can do everything I need to, and it was actually pretty easy to learn. >> You really should do yourself a favour and learn to do more with photoshop. It is an incredible tool. In fact, I would say it is one of my most valuable pieces of photographic equipment I have.I spend a lot of time just playing with it and learning various techniques etc. If you are lucky enough to have a version you may as well get the most out of it... Vic < I have PS 6 on 3 machines and Elements on 1.I mostly use PS 6 to do minor adjustments with pic's from the D1.Levels,curves some cloning etc.I know there is a ton more to learn, just gotta do it:) I have 2 teenagers who work for me on my on site jobs and i usually watch what they do.They know more than me.I just tell them what i want to see in the photo's(they are both amatuer photographers too so that helps)they do it and print.Works well. I have a book but its basic,shows results but not always how they got it done,but it helps. I like 2 things Elements has,the colour tool and the fill flash. Have not done layers persay but my front cover for this years yearbook may be an overlay,so i'll have to play there. Basically like driving a porshe in downtown Toronto,lots of power just can't use it wisely:)(but one day) Dave End Original Message Pentax User Stouffville Ontario Canada http://home.ca.inter.net/brooksdj/ http://brooks1952.tripod.com/myhorses Sign up today for your Free E-mail at: http://www.canoe.ca/CanoeMail
Re: OT: sliding away?
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Guys if you have limited experience with photoshop, I highly recommend photodeluxe which is also made by adobe and comes free with many decent Epson printers and various scanners. It really is simple to use and guides you through most steps with ease. It can do most of what photoshop can do (including layers) and generally do it easier (at least for beginners) Once you get good at it, set it on advanced mode and it's even closer to photoshop. Vic < although not discontinued yet, Photodeluxe is pretty close to being. Photoshop Elements is the replacement. Herb
Re: OT: sliding away?
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >You really should do yourself a favour and learn to do more with photoshop. It is an incredible tool. In fact, I would say it is one of my most valuable pieces of photographic equipment I have.I spend a lot of time just playing with it and learning various techniques etc. If you are lucky enough to have a version you may as well get the most out of it... Vic < look online at Amazon. there are at least two books only on photo retouching using Photoshop and almost all of the rest have something to say about it. Herb
Re: OT: sliding away?
In a message dated 11/11/02 10:05:50 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << I've never bother to do anything of note in it, until recently.. The last few times I've turned the PC on, I've learned how to use curves and levels to make a nicer looking image, and how to clone out dust. Then I learned how to correctly resize images and DPI for printing. Is there more to photoshop? Oh yeah. Do I need to learn it? Nope. I can do everything I need to, and it was actually pretty easy to learn. >> You really should do yourself a favour and learn to do more with photoshop. It is an incredible tool. In fact, I would say it is one of my most valuable pieces of photographic equipment I have.I spend a lot of time just playing with it and learning various techniques etc. If you are lucky enough to have a version you may as well get the most out of it... Vic
Re: OT: sliding away?
Guys if you have limited experience with photoshop, I highly recommend photodeluxe which is also made by adobe and comes free with many decent Epson printers and various scanners. It really is simple to use and guides you through most steps with ease. It can do most of what photoshop can do (including layers) and generally do it easier (at least for beginners) Once you get good at it, set it on advanced mode and it's even closer to photoshop. Vic In a message dated 11/11/02 11:39:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << gfen wrote, re Photoshop: = snipped = > Seriously, its pretty easy to do the basics.. I'm still figuring out the > in depth parts of curves and levels, but cloning to spot is a godsend. Huh? "[C]loning to spot" is outside my understanding. Please elucidate! keith whaley >>
Re: OT: sliding away?
Aha! I'd like that, I just intuit! Thanks for the explanation. keith gfen wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Keith Whaley wrote: > > Huh? "[C]loning to spot" is outside my understanding. Please elucidate! > > Using the clone tool to spot your "prints" for dust, hair, fingerprints, > etc. To say nothing of the ability to use the clone tool to remove power > lines, facial blemishes, your ex-girlfriend, etc. > > :)
Re: OT: sliding away?
On Monday, November 11, 2002, at 10:42 AM, gfen wrote: On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Keith Whaley wrote: Huh? "[C]loning to spot" is outside my understanding. Please elucidate! Using the clone tool to spot your "prints" for dust, hair, fingerprints, etc. To say nothing of the ability to use the clone tool to remove power lines, facial blemishes, your ex-girlfriend, etc. :) Try the new bandaid brush in v.7, delightful. Doesn't do everything of course, but it goes to town on dust spots, fine scratches and loose fibers. Takes care of most of what I used the cloning stamp for. Dan Scott
Re: OT: sliding away?
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Keith Whaley wrote: > Huh? "[C]loning to spot" is outside my understanding. Please elucidate! Using the clone tool to spot your "prints" for dust, hair, fingerprints, etc. To say nothing of the ability to use the clone tool to remove power lines, facial blemishes, your ex-girlfriend, etc. :) -- http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
Re: OT: sliding away?
When I see a sky with nice clouds I make a few exposures. Now I have a library of beautiful skies. I use them from time to time to put clouds onto images that have few or none. I used to do this in the darkroom, in my youth, and later found it possible to do a creditable job in Photoshop. Use the magic wand to select the sky and after that its like falling off a log. Using a layer to change the contrast in some areas - say to improve shadow detail is also very easy. Perhaps a few days studying the tutorials would be profitable? I too remove spots, drying marks and dust with the rubber stamp (cloning tool) - I've found it better than any of the other methods. Don Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 - Original Message - From: "gfen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 5:03 PM Subject: Re: OT: sliding away? > On Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Keith Whaley wrote: > > And, for the 1/10th of 1% that you actually use and enjoy, you're > > going thru all that sweat and tears? > > Nah, not me, thanks... > > I'm a longstanding computer geek, and every computer I've owned for the > last 10 years or so has had a copy of Photoshop on it..Not because I > needed it, but because it was expected. > > I've never bother to do anything of note in it, until recently.. The last > few times I've turned the PC on, I've learned how to use curves and levels > to make a nicer looking image, and how to clone out dust. Then I learned > how to correctly resize images and DPI for printing. > > Is there more to photoshop? Oh yeah. > Do I need to learn it? Nope. I can do everything I need to, and it was > actually pretty easy to learn. > > > -- > http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. > http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio. >
Re: OT: sliding away?
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Keith Whaley wrote: > How did it GET There? -cough- That would be TELLING. Anyways, I was a 13 year old geek when I got my first PC (from a trash bin in the very industrial park I now work), before that I had my share of PCs. At the time, we all pirated software to our heart's content. It was expected of us. To say nothing of the old "warez" boards I frequented, sysop'd on, and the short lived glory days of being in our very own group (for the record, we had one release, we trumped the big guys, and I still have the .nfo file somewhere). So, anyway, yeah.. > > Not because I needed it, but because it was expected. > Expected to BE there, by you? Did you ask for it to be loaded by the > seller of the CPU? Again, computer geeks are expected to have computers glutted to the gills with all sorts of fanciful software they didn't use except to make the occasional bas relief filtered image. ;) > Okay, points taken. Thanks for the words... Seriously, its pretty easy to do teh basics.. I'm still figuring out the indepth parts of curves and levels, but cloning to spot is a godsend. -- http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
Re: OT: sliding away?
Your comments understood and agreed with... That's about what I'd need/want to do, as well. Other comments within the text below... gfen wrote: > > On Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Keith Whaley wrote: > > And, for the 1/10th of 1% that you actually use and enjoy, you're > > going thru all that sweat and tears? > > Nah, not me, thanks... > > I'm a longstanding computer geek, and every computer I've owned for the > last 10 years or so has had a copy of Photoshop on it.. How did it GET There? > Not because I needed it, but because it was expected. Expected to BE there, by you? Did you ask for it to be loaded by the seller of the CPU? > I've never bother to do anything of note in it, until recently.. The last > few times I've turned the PC on, I've learned how to use curves and levels > to make a nicer looking image, and how to clone out dust. Then I learned > how to correctly resize images and DPI for printing. > > Is there more to photoshop? Oh yeah. > Do I need to learn it? Nope. I can do everything I need to, and it was > actually pretty easy to learn. Okay, points taken. Thanks for the words... keiht whaley
Re: OT: sliding away?
On Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Keith Whaley wrote: > And, for the 1/10th of 1% that you actually use and enjoy, you're > going thru all that sweat and tears? > Nah, not me, thanks... I'm a longstanding computer geek, and every computer I've owned for the last 10 years or so has had a copy of Photoshop on it..Not because I needed it, but because it was expected. I've never bother to do anything of note in it, until recently.. The last few times I've turned the PC on, I've learned how to use curves and levels to make a nicer looking image, and how to clone out dust. Then I learned how to correctly resize images and DPI for printing. Is there more to photoshop? Oh yeah. Do I need to learn it? Nope. I can do everything I need to, and it was actually pretty easy to learn. -- http://www.infotainment.org <-> more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com<-> photography and portfolio.
Re: OT: sliding away?
On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 03:34 PM, Keith Whaley wrote: Hi Dan, a couple of comments below... Have you ever down-loaded and reviewed the 237 page instruction manual that comes with it? Most impressive ~ and I'm talking about image manipulation! Which app are we talking about here, GraphicConverter? I'm pretty sure the man came on the disk Lemke sent me, but I don't remember it being nearly that big. And that was only...umm, cripes I keep forgetting it's my turn to be the geezer. My comment on Graphic Converter is probably several years and many, many generations out of date. The biggest part of the learning curve for me was finally figuring out that 99.9 percent of what it can do is stuff that completely messes up photos (for my purposes). The remaining 00.1 percent, however, makes all the difference in the world. And, for the 1/10th of 1% that you actually use and enjoy, you're going thru all that sweat and tears? Nah, not me, thanks... But that 1/10th of 1% does about 100% of what I need it to. And learning Photoshop was both fun and frustrating in turn, not horrible though. I do regret the images I've left mangled on the wayside in the process. I suspect that a competent photographer would learn Photoshop more quickly than I did, as I was also trying to figure out what kind of things I wanted to do with it--knowledge I think most seasoned photographers would already have. They'd mainly be mapping familiar tasks to a new tool. (my theory, at any rate) Dan Scott
Re: OT: sliding away?
I agree with Herb that the color management in Photoshop is very important to getting good and consistent results. An added advantage is that there is a lot of good training books and videos. I would go with Photoshop Elements (their lite version about $100 US) most of what you need will be there, though some are in different places. BUTCH "Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself" Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: OT: sliding away?
Hi Dan, a couple of comments below... Dan Scott wrote: > > On Sunday, November 10, 2002, at 07:28 AM, Herb Chong wrote: > > > Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Which means I would need to buy a film scanner. > > I have a document scanner that does top quality documents, but I don't > > think it's optimized for film... I'll have to check my manual > > carefully. > > I know I'd be very unhappy with it if it were only mediochre. I can > > get that from my film processor now! > > So that's a bit of an outlay that needs amortizing over a long time. > > > > Secondly, I am not prepared for the learning curve on Photoshop! I > > have paid careful attention to those who have used it for a long time, > > and in essense they all agree that it is a steep curve, and takes > > dedicated effort to be facile with it... > > I think that "ColorIt!" or "GraphicConverter" would do as well, if I > > took the time to acquire that skill with them.< = snipped = Dan replied: > Photoshop Elements is getting really good press, and it's a lot cheaper > than the full blown package. I'm not sure if the learning curve is any > different, but it might be an option. ColorIt I found confusing and not > as powerful, and GraphicConverter, while excellent at opening and > translating files, is actually very limited (in my experience). Have you ever down-loaded and reviewed the 237 page instruction manual that comes with it? Most impressive ~ and I'm talking about image manipulation! > Photoshop is worth the effort. Once you become familiar and capable with it. No argument from me! > The biggest part of the learning curve > for me was finally figuring out that 99.9 percent of what it can do is > stuff that completely messes up photos (for my purposes). The > remaining 00.1 percent, however, makes all the difference in the world. And, for the 1/10th of 1% that you actually use and enjoy, you're going thru all that sweat and tears? Nah, not me, thanks... > Dan Scott keith
Re: OT: sliding away?
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Which means I would need to buy a film scanner. I have a document scanner that does top quality documents, but I don't think it's optimized for film... I'll have to check my manual carefully. I know I'd be very unhappy with it if it were only mediochre. I can get that from my film processor now! So that's a bit of an outlay that needs amortizing over a long time. Secondly, I am not prepared for the learning curve on Photoshop! I have paid careful attention to those who have used it for a long time, and in essense they all agree that it is a steep curve, and takes dedicated effort to be facile with it... I think that "ColorIt!" or "GraphicConverter" would do as well, if I took the time to acquire that skill with them.< you don't need a hugely expensive film scanner. however, only Photoshop and a couple of other applications do color management well enough so that you get consistent results when you tweak an image by looking at it on the screen and then just printing. at the PhotoPlus Expo, any vendor who was not selling their own brand of printers and doing digital output was using an Epson printer to print their demos. Herb
Re: OT: sliding away?
alex wrote: > > Keith, > > I found if I scan my slides with a quality film scanner, > Photoshop them slightly and print on a decent Epson > inkjet, I get better results than commercial labs can > (or willing to) do with negatives. > > This could be an indication of my local labs quality :=) > > I suspect that scanning and printing at home is also > cheaper, at least on a long run, than paying for lab > services. > > Alex Which means I would need to buy a film scanner. I have a document scanner that does top quality documents, but I don't think it's optimized for film... I'll have to check my manual carefully. I know I'd be very unhappy with it if it were only mediochre. I can get that from my film processor now! So that's a bit of an outlay that needs amortizing over a long time. Secondly, I am not prepared for the learning curve on Photoshop! I have paid careful attention to those who have used it for a long time, and in essense they all agree that it is a steep curve, and takes dedicated effort to be facile with it... I think that "ColorIt!" or "GraphicConverter" would do as well, if I took the time to acquire that skill with them. Third, my HP printer is totally out of the question when it comes to good images from photos, so as you say, an Epson is in my future! I'm not making nor do I plan to make any money with my photos, so I can't justify the time and expense to make such a big deal out of doing it myself. All of which goes to say, in spite of my apparent negative attitude regarding going that far personally, your advice has merit and I realize that if I did choose to set up to do it myself I'd be far happier. No question about it, so thanks for the heads up. keith whaley > -Original Message- > From: Keith Whaley [mailto:keith_w@;dslextreme.com] > Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 4:35 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: OT: sliding away? > > ... > I have yet to find a suitable printer, who will print what I see when > I take the shot. > I get prints back from the printer, look at the prints, then glass the > negatives and see _far_ more detail than is on paper. Subtle shadow > detail lost in the mud. > For the most part, the film I'm using doesn't matter all that much. > Yes, some films reproduce shadow detail better than others, but > ignoring that fine point for the moment, I really hesitate to go to ta > custom lab and pay very high prices just for getting a decent print > from my negatives! > > Exactly as Bruce says. > > Maybe I'm not approaching it right...or I need to find a proper > digital lab? > Anyone know of one in L.A.? > > keith whaley
Re[2]: OT: sliding away?
If you are doing a few prints, that may be a reasonable route. But if you are doing lots and lots of them, time and money soon become factors. Bruce Saturday, November 9, 2002, 5:05:38 AM, you wrote: Pac> In a message dated 11/9/02 7:50:54 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Pac> << i think you are stuck these days. only a good custom lab will deliver the Pac> kinds of results that you want, but they are not cheap. Herb... >>> Pac> Learning to print your own is certainly a giant step forward when it comes to Pac> prints from slides. They may not me perfect but they are pretty darn close. Pac> Vic
Re[2]: OT: sliding away?
Keith, Your welcome to try my lab. The owner has offered a free 11X14 or 8X10 for the cost of shipping to PDML members that want to see what it can do. They use Agfa D-Labs. That being said, one thing to keep in mind is that the paper has less latitude than the film does. So you are always in a battle to figure out what to represent on the paper. I suspect good labs make intelligent choices that best represent the negative and poor labs, don't care and just let the print fall where it may. Bruce Saturday, November 9, 2002, 4:35:27 AM, you wrote: KW> Something that's been bouncing around in my mind for some time now... KW> Now that you've brought it up, I'll mention it. KW> I started with shooting slides in my Retina I back in about 1939, plus KW> or minus...too long ago to zero in on it more precisely. KW> I still have a still life slide (Kodachrome 25 or 50?) of a rose KW> blossom, against a darker background, that will blow your socks off! KW> And yes, taken back then! KW> If I were only shooting for myself, I'd only be shooting slide film KW> today ~ exclusively. KW> But, I do not use my cameras professionally in any way. I shoot KW> primarily for recording where I've been, and what I see there, and KW> sharing my personal enjoyment of that experience with others. KW> And that does not mean dragging my slide projector with me everytime I KW> want to show off my photos! KW> If I had a fool proof and proven to me way of getting really decent KW> prints from slide film, I'd do it in a heartbeat! KW> Well, maybe not... I think the cost would be prohibitive, truth be known. KW> That's one reason I bought a decent digital camera. Most of the folks KW> with whom I want to share my photos are online and can view them that KW> way. Still, it has it's limitations. KW> On occasion, you want to share with those who will never get online. KW> Then, it's prints. KW> I have yet to find a suitable printer, who will print what I see when KW> I take the shot. KW> I get prints back from the printer, look at the prints, then glass the KW> negatives and see _far_ more detail than is on paper. Subtle shadow KW> detail lost in the mud. KW> For the most part, the film I'm using doesn't matter all that much. KW> Yes, some films reproduce shadow detail better than others, but KW> ignoring that fine point for the moment, I really hesitate to go to ta KW> custom lab and pay very high prices just for getting a decent print KW> from my negatives! KW> Exactly as Bruce says. KW> Maybe I'm not approaching it right...or I need to find a proper KW> digital lab? KW> Anyone know of one in L.A.? KW> keith whaley KW> Bruce Dayton wrote: >> >> Cory, >> >> The most frustrating thing about slides is trying to get great prints >> at a reasonable price from them. You look at the slide and go WOW! >> Then you try to get a print made and get disappointed, or you pay a >> princely sum. About the only really good way to do it is to have a >> good scanner for slides and a good printer or Digital Lab service >> available. For me, I have the Digital Lab available but no scanner >> that does the slide justice. >> >> Prepare for some wonderful surprises as you gaze at those slides on a >> light table with a loupe. >> >> Bruce >> >> Friday, November 8, 2002, 7:51:02 PM, you wrote: >> >> C> I bought a roll of slide film the other day...never done that before. It >> C> was just hanging there next to the rest of the film looking lonely. I had >> C> to save it. >> C> I've not finished the roll in either camera yet so I guess it's going to >> C> have to wait a few days. Wonder how I'll get it developed. >> >> C> Cory Waters
Re: OT: sliding away?
Message text written by INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Learning to print your own is certainly a giant step forward when it comes to prints from slides. They may not me perfect but they are pretty darn close. Vic < i scan and print digitally. best possible results for the least hassle. not cheap either. Herb...
Re: OT: sliding away?
Cory, The most frustrating thing about slides is trying to get great prints at a reasonable price from them. You look at the slide and go WOW! Then you try to get a print made and get disappointed, or you pay a princely sum. About the only really good way to do it is to have a good scanner for slides and a good printer or Digital Lab service available. For me, I have the Digital Lab available but no scanner that does the slide justice. Prepare for some wonderful surprises as you gaze at those slides on a light table with a loupe. Bruce Friday, November 8, 2002, 7:51:02 PM, you wrote: C> I bought a roll of slide film the other day...never done that before. It C> was just hanging there next to the rest of the film looking lonely. I had C> to save it. C> I've not finished the roll in either camera yet so I guess it's going to C> have to wait a few days. Wonder how I'll get it developed. C> Cory Waters
OT: sliding away?
I bought a roll of slide film the other day...never done that before. It was just hanging there next to the rest of the film looking lonely. I had to save it. I've not finished the roll in either camera yet so I guess it's going to have to wait a few days. Wonder how I'll get it developed. Cory Waters
