Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: Grey Barn Studio
Oct 5, 2012 12:14:06   #
Reading an article on Outdoor Photography on Novoflex lens adapters. I searched the archives and couldn't find anything related that address the adapting of Medium format lenses to a DSLR. What are the advantages/disadantges? I'm specifically looking to adapt Mamiya 645 lenses to a Nikon. Novoflex does list this adapter combination.
Go to
Oct 3, 2012 09:50:16   #
Back in the 80's I went on a photo workshop in Ireland. I lugged a home made 4X5 a 6X4.5 and a 35mm. My experience then was that I shot about 15 to 20 shots on the 4X5 and printed about 10. Approx 75 on the medium format and a bunch on the 35mm (slides) The 4X5 were time consuming,composed shots. My best one (4X5) was in the Cleveland Museum of Art May Show in 1981. The medium format were well thought out shots and the 35mm were, I'm here and, this is what I saw. Shooting digital today I tend to think the majority of my shots out but when I'm with my grandsons I fire away and then choose from the best. There fast little guys and I hate to miss a shot.
Go to
Jun 28, 2012 09:08:57   #
Tim, couldn't have said it better myself.
Go to
May 10, 2012 08:23:48   #
Whole new meaning to Shooting the Moon. Nice shot
Go to
Feb 28, 2012 15:43:04   #
I'm still using PhotoShop 7 so I'm not sure if any of these programs will work with it. I did have stitch at one time but lost it when I upgraded computers. I've just been doing it manually. Like I said sometimes cumbersome but it works. Thanks for the info I'll check out those programs.
renomike wrote:
Grey Barn Studio wrote:
I have been using this technique (scanning half at a time) for quite awhile with good success. I do however find a slight misalignment problem that I have to tweak by transforming the image edges. A little practice as to the best way to do this usually solves the problem but it still is a little time consuming


I use Photo Merge in PShop & PSElements, and never had problems with misalignment. Does a great job on multiple shot panoramas too.

Mike
Go to
Feb 28, 2012 09:00:03   #
I have been using this technique (scanning half at a time) for quite awhile with good success. I do however find a slight misalignment problem that I have to tweak by transforming the image edges. A little practice as to the best way to do this usually solves the problem but it still is a little time consuming.
renomike wrote:
Scan it one half at a time, and stich it back together. I have done it several times. Works great. The broken and missing edge pieces are easy to fix. You can also take it in to Kinkos or Office Depot, and have it color copied, and use that as your work piece, so you don't do any more damage to the original picture while handling it.

I've been restoring family photos for about 15 years.

Mike
Go to
Feb 16, 2012 09:35:14   #
Enjoyed the story very much.
Go to
Feb 8, 2012 10:31:43   #
dparker708 wrote:
Hello all -

I'm looking for advice on how to avoid shadows when taking indoor family portraits.

Thank you.....


The advice on Bounce is all correct. It does however leave a shadow around the eyes that on some (depth of eye socket) can be bothersome. When I use a bounce I add a small white reflector card to my flash and this kicks in just enough light to soften that shadow.
Go to
Feb 4, 2012 14:47:38   #
I was not aware of this exchange until today and thanks to the individual who supplied the link so I could review what has transpired. Sometimes those who protest the most are the one that have something to hide or are ashamed of in their lives. I would suggest a thorough exam for Jackinthebox I think he/she sees things that are not there.
Go to
Dec 9, 2011 09:05:16   #
I was just going to post the same type of comment. 600dpi is pretty high resolution.

JimH wrote:
rivernan wrote:
go to the search engine above and put in copyright or watermark and you will probably find a slew of different answers to your question.
Good Answer. A slew, indeed. If not a plethora. Or a Cornucopia.

rivernan wrote:
<snip>keep your pictures at about 600dpi and they will be too small for anyone to bother trying to steal anyway.
I think you mean 600 pixels in width/height. 600 DPI is a fairly high PRINTING density (DOTS PER INCH), it has nothing per se to do with the size of an image. And sometimes you hear to convert images to 72 DPI, because that is a typical MONITOR or screen DPI, but is way to 'loose' for printing. If you printed a picture at 72 DPI, it would have the resolution of your typical newspaper photo, eg crappy.

It's all very confusioning because computer geeks like to keep everybody befuddled... :) - Makes 'em look more like witch doctors.
quote=rivernan go to the search engine above and ... (show quote)
Go to
Dec 5, 2011 14:09:19   #
The big problem with your correction is you corrected one object and sent two others in the opposite direction. The one that really bothers me in this is the jar with oil in the middle with the liquid level going down hill. Possibly correct in PS similar to the way you would do it with a large format camera.
Go to
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.