It's very clear - those anti control senators are more concerned with the next election than carrying out the will of the people, who by and large want more control. But the all important campaign money is not with the people, but with the NRA and gun manufacturers.
Bangee5 wrote:
Background check plan defeated in Senate, Obama rips gun bill opponents
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/04/17/background-check-plan-in-trouble-as-dems-call-votes-on-gun-bill/#ixzz2QmcsDdsT
In many years of taking landscapes, I've only been asked (actually told) to leave once. While I was on a public road with a small camera and no tripod, fully within my rights, I didn't argue, but I did get my pic just before he came upon me!
Picdude wrote:
If you're just taking pictures of land, pastures, wooded lots, outbuildings, etc. I would say you probably won't have any problems. If you want to photograph their actual house or buildings/barns up close to the house, it may be a good idea to go to the door and ask. That could cause considerably less stress on everyone's part and you're liable to get a good story behind your picture to boot.
Not only does that camera have the articulating LCD screen, but you can see all the settings thru the viewfinder. I still regret the disappearing viewfinders these days in the less expensive cameras. I have a point and shoot Canon, with a viewfinder. It is very handy when I don't want to be toting my SX-40. I just hope it doesn't break down, as I know I'd have a hard time replacing it in kind.
Wahawk wrote:
This issue is the main reason I chose the SX40 when looking for a bridge camera. The LCD is fully articulating and allows me to eliminate glare in nearly all situations, in fact haven't found a time when I couldn't see the LCD without glare.
I tried a similar method a year or so ago, but wasn't happy with the results. But then I just projected the slide onto a white wall, then took a photo. Perhaps using a lightbox would work better, so I too would be interested in the details - maybe even a pic of your lightbox and your overall set up. Thanks.
hpucker99 wrote:
chirschfield wrote:
with slides the fastest way to convert is to photograph them. I used a small lightbox and a close-up lens. I made a setup with the camera on a tripod shooting down and put a cardboard corner on the lightbox to position the slides.
I was able to do one every 10-20 seconds - say 200 an hour. this is much faster than scanning.
Can you post some of your results and the specifics of your lens and camera? A few years ago I tested a similar method of photographing slides by projected on a screen.
quote=chirschfield with slides the fastest way to... (
show quote)
I can see this process being effective for digitally reproducing a handful of slides, but when one has upwards of 1000 or more, the time involved might be more than many of us can spare. I'm looking for a device that can handle both getting rid of the dust and scanning slides, all in one motion, with reasonable good color reproduction, if such a one exists. Thanks again.
Mogul wrote:
From Wikipedia:
"Digital ICE is used to detect scratches and dust during transparent film scan and is not applicable for opaque document scanning. Where Chromogenic black-and-white films are supported by Digital ICE, other black-and-white films containing metallic silver (which form from silver halides during the development process of the film) are not. This is because the long wave infrared light passes through the slide but not through dust particles. The silver particles reflect the infrared light in a similar manner to dust particles, thus respond equally in visible light and infrared light. A similar phenomenon also prevents Kodak Kodachrome slides from being scanned with Digital ICE (Kodachrome's cyan layer absorbs infrared)."
Now try this:
http://laughingbunny.wordpress.com/2012/06/26/cleaning-restoring-a-35mm-slide/
From Wikipedia: br br "Digital ICE is used t... (
show quote)
I found it on line, both on Canon's and Amazon.com's site, but didn't see mention of it being used to convert slides to digital. In any event, I have a scanner/printer that is quite adequate for those tasks, hence don't really need, nor want to pay for, a multipurpose device.
So what might be recommended in the way of a device for strictly converting slides to digital, with as good a dust removal mechanism as possible?
I have one that I got a couple years ago for about $80, but I have two problems with it. One, the little brush that came with it doesn't get rid of the dust that well. The other is that vivid colors, such as in sunrises and sunsets, don't come thru that well.
Thanks.
GWR100 wrote:
I have a Canon MP980 and have converted hundreds of slides and its very easy and all are perfect. Don't bother with the cheap converters, they don't work. Hope this helps.
mrtoad90 wrote:
i am retired after years and years of taking kodachrome slides - switched a number of years ago to digital - with the spare time i have now i would like to put the slides into a digital format - any suggestions to help with this process would be helpful
if you suggest a scanner - which one do you recommend
thanks
mr toad
I have a Canon MP980 and have converted hundreds o... (
show quote)
There is a lodge there, but I suspect it's closed in the winter, then booked fairly solidly starting in the spring.
AuntieM wrote:
I also like #2 best. The yellow in the first shot seems a bit of a distraction. Otherwise, great shots. At the N. Rim, can you actually stay in the Lodge?
I love your analogy with robbing a bank - like photographers and bank robbers, they're all alike!!
With robbing a bank, there's always the chance of a bigger haul the next time, so by the same token, the next moon pic may be better than the last one.
But having said that, when I got my Canon SX40 last fall, with that great zoom lens, I took many moon pix of the moon in different phases, experimenting with different settings.
But I'm taking fewer now - for one it's now winter, but more to the point, while I certainly don't have the perfect shot, I see diminishing returns the more I take them, meaning unless the sky happens to be extra clear one nite that likely I cannot much improve on what I already have in my "moon" pic files.
>>>I like to shoot the moon because of the challenge, and the hope of getting a more defined and detail picture than before. When I get what looks like a decent shot, I enlarge it to see what the focus is and the detail that is present and how good the contrast is. Very few meet the criteria of the almost perfect shot. It is like robbing a bank, that is where the money is. I believe it is the challenge that is fascinating and that perfect shot we are hoping for.. :) :)
I was there a few years ago and took many pix in the day that I was there, but none so good as these two - congrats!
saparoo wrote:
My husband and I took a trip out west and here are a couple of pictures from Zion Canyon
If I was to go to Africa, it'd likely be a worthwhile expense, since I'd be in a real pickle if something went wrong, or I forgot how to do something, and no manual.
nealabello wrote:
I guess I was one of the lucky ones. My 7D came with a "real" manual. One could also get one of the many Field Guides for the camera (see Amazon) which, while not as small as a manual, are still portable.
Good advice, except that manufacturers, like Canon, are getting away from printed manuals and giving customers a CD instead. Great when one is home, but not so when away from home and no laptop. I guess I could print a copy, but at over 200 pages, that's a lot of paper!
>>>Be sure to take your manual.
I thought that mite be the answer, but I couldn't see the connection - I guess it's because chimps like to look at themselves in mirrors? Anyway, in your pic, the photog would definitely have a problem!
Mudshark wrote:
"Chimp is a term photographers have give to the idea of looking at the LCD after each shot..." Yes, and if staring back at you from the shiny plastic screen is an image similar to this...not only have you shot the chimp but you've got a much larger problem at hand...
Probably a stupid question, but do you mean by "Chimp"?
<<<Chimp often so you can redo if necessary>>>
I had the same very positive experience with Canon tech support last fall after acquiring my then new SX40.
RixPix wrote:
Like many of the folks on this forum I have a number of years of experience operating cameras. In fact, my experience goes all the way back to a Mamiya Sekor in 1972. I have been using digital cameras since 1998 and a digital SLR since 2003 and although I have never considered myself an expert in either the art or science of photography I have always been able to work through or around any issue of operating a camera..until yesterday. Yesterday I received I got a new Canon Rebel T4i to replace my T2i. I replace my camera every two years whether it needs it or not. I do this in part to take advantage of the latest technologies and in part because I like new toys. Now, there is nothing wrong with my T2i it works perfectly. I use it in conjunction with Canon's EOS utility and control it remotely with my computer for product photography. Canon's system works very well for me and I have been using it for years updating the software with every updated camera.
Yesterday after taking a few sample shots with the new camera of my desk, cat and other things around the house I installed the software and connected the camera into my system. I put in the ac adapter and plugged in the USB connection. The little notification of the device driver popped up, the EOS utility started and we were good to go. I clicked on the live view and the camera stayed on for exactly 4 seconds, then shut itself down and closed the software. I spent the next 4 hours reading the software instructions, reading the camera, instructions, and Canon's service FAQ. I connected the T2i back to the new software and it worked perfectly. I connected the T4i and it shut down. I uninstalled all the software wiped the system registry and started all over again...twice...still nothing. Now I am beginning to think that something is wrong with the camera.
I have never called Canon before for anything at any time in the nearly 26 years I have been using the EOS line of cameras. So after finding the phone number and discovering that their tech support works until midnight on the east coast I called. I explained in detail what I had done and gave a brief history of my experience using the software and Canon cameras. The woman on the phone asked me to check the following do the following:
Turn off facial recognition and...
Connect the camera directly to the computer USB jacks and not to a hub. (I used a powered hub built into my illuminated photo cube).
That worked. The new cameras from Canon require a certain speed of connection which my hub was not providing. The camera was not "talking" to the software in time for the software to recognize the information and so the software assumed a lost connection. Interestingly, the old connection worked fine to transfer files but not to operate the camera.
The Canon rep was pleasant and helpful. Kudos to the them for long hours and trained people.
Like many of the folks on this forum I have a numb... (
show quote)
Thanks. I figured that, but good to have it confirmed.
Pepper wrote:
You could vote for your own photo 20 times but still only one point will be awarded.