Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

689 profile views
  1. I don't think it is temperature either, I had it freeze up when I was outside shooting in a blizzard, literally. And although I use LV almost exclusively, I always turn it off between shots, which means it hasn't frozen up in a long time. Something to do with LV though.
  2. Now that I've had the M10 Monochrom for a couple of years, my best guess is that the freezing up has to do with LiveView plus one other unknown interaction. Since I have been much more conscious of turning off LiveView as much as possible, I have had barely any freezes. I can also now rule out some kind of overheating cause, as just a month or two ago I had a freeze while shooting outside in a blizzard. So I would recommend turning off LiveView after each shot, since for me I have gone close to a year without a freeze while scrupulously turning it off... even though I basically use LiveView for every shot. Seems to work for me, and the way I use the camera. I am disappointed that there has not been a fix, that gets close to being unforgivable for what should be one of the highest quality cameras in the world.
  3. Gerbs


    I don't think it would be great as a travel lens. It's pretty heavy and manipulating it is a bit cumbersome. If you like 90mm, I'd consider the 90 macro with extender. for travel. The only drawback there is it doesn't open up very far. But the macro is a great tool to have on hand, IMO, for something like travel. The 85mm Summarex is a great lens, can give you soft focus, nice bokeh, or quite clear images. It is big and heavy, however. But it is a favorite of mine. On the other hand, if you used a Thambar for travel, your photos wouldn't look like everyone else's. That would be nice.
  4. NEC PA271Q, with SpectraView II calibration, works nicely for me, on a PC. Probably works for Mac too.
  5. Looks like old, tired, and dirty developer, at least back in the good old days. Or, if we think digitally, it's like the gamma adjustment is off... the middle of middle gray isn't where it needs to be. It does seem to go from full white to full black, but nonetheless seems washed out and over-exposed. Back to the old days, it seems like it could have benefited from Ansel Adams Zone System... putting certain tones exactly where you want them, and manipulating exposure and development time to fit the tones you are shooting. My quick adjustment below is using Levels in Photoshop. Black to 12, Gamma (or mids) to 0.9, and Whites to 240. I didn't bring the darkest tones to full black, or the lightest to full white, but did spread them out from the original. There's actually a little more separation between the sky and the far building, which I was really glad to see.
  6. Gerbs


    My Thambar dates from 1935, and takes a 48mm filter.
  7. This is just my personal goals, but I feel that any processing that is obvious is too much. Too much contrast, too much sharpening. That doesn't mean that there can't be great amounts of processing, but for me I don't want it to be obvious, I want my photos to look possible in nature, as if they came directly from the camera. As far as TIFFs, they are a lossless file format, so they are best, IF the lab can take them in and use them without conversion to something else. When I print using Capture One files, I don't reduce the size if you mean resample the image down, I increase the pixels per inch so that the print size is what I want. The printer has very high resolution, and the QuadToneRIP that processes my files and drives the printer will consume as many pixels as I can feed it, so to speak. One of the things that may have happened with the halos turning blue is that they aren't white, but rather light gray. My guess is that light cyan is considered by the printer (the machine) as the closest thing it has to offer for light gray. If the lab used a printer without color, the halos would have been an odd-looking monotone, but better than blue!
  8. I am certainly no expert, but I have a couple of observations. The lab you sent to doesn't actually print black and white prints, they imitate them on a color printer, so no matter how good the file you send it will not be of the highest quality, with that lab, for black and white prints. They should be using a printer with a bunch of shades of gray in their ink cartridges, to create gorgeous and accurate black and white prints. When I look at the B&W image you sent, it looks like all the tree leaves are surrounded by a white halo. Too me, to my eye, it looks like waaaay too much sharpening and contrast and/or clarity. If you are sending JPEG files to the lab, it just asks for further trouble, as JPEG artifacts are particularly noticed around the edges of things. If you ARE using JPEGs in Capture One, set the file to be the highest quality you can... the amount of compression to the minimum should equal the fewest problems with that file type. Capture One can render (make a flie) according to various profiles, ask the lab what you should use. Without a monitor that can be calibrated, it may be trial and error to find what works with what you see on screen and what you get back from the lab. Photos cannot have the range of tone that a monitor has, because they are reflected light whereas the monitor uses light itself, so prints will look different. Not worse, just different. I believe you are seeing artifacts of the whole process: your sharpening, your file type, the print software at the lab (they should have settings they can change to match what you are sending, unless the "lab" is just a drug store photo print service, in which case it is all automated, I would guess). You could efficiently run a test by combining a number of samples into one file, cropping and pasting together, and send that to your service. That way it just costs 1 print. Also, find out if they accept TIFF files.
  9. Gerbs


    On B&H there's a nice bunch of user photos (for the 85mm Lensbaby at least). I did notice a couple had ugly fringing, just like with the Thambar it is possible to get ugly bokeh, in my opinion. But with care, as we've seen above, it can make emotionally charged photos. Ideally you have a willing model to put a lot of time into perfecting how you use it for portraits, LOL. I do like my Summarex a lot for carrying around, and use it a whole lot more often than the Thambar.
  10. Gerbs


    You could probably get a lens for Canon or Nikon and use an adapter to M. I have used an old manual Nikon F lens on my M, worked fine. Anyone have a Lensbaby Velvet for Nikon F, I could give it a try...
  11. Since you mention inkjet, have you considered writing on white paper, scanning it, and using it to make a masked overlay on your digital file BEFORE printing, so that your writing becomes part of the final inkjet print itself? The mask could be over a gradient if you need the text to go from white to black, for instance.
  12. I prefer the color version because it lets me participate in the scene more as a viewer. There's really only two things that bother me in this street scene: the chopped off bright orange (donation container?) thing at his feet is just too eye catching in a bad way, and the fact that he is tuning and not playing. The "crowd" in the window smiling and all makes a better reaction story if the musician is actually playing, I think. The B&W version becomes annoying, the lights above the musician are distracting, his legs disappear into the background so he is like a legless floating musician out of Ghostbusters or something, and the high contrast doesn't add to the story for me; it seems to destroy rhythms and flatten the image, and only magnifies composition problems because it becomes so graphic. An almost purely graphic image needs to have excellent flow and rhythm just in the graphics, else the story is lost. To my eye.
  13. If you could've gotten the shadowed branch in focus... nice yin yang then.
  14. Hmmm. A lobster boat is kind of like a pickup truck! M10M, 1.4/50mm Summilux ASPH
  • Create New...