ste © said:Quoted message said:I've got a huge photo collection stretching back 19 years, I estimate something in the region of
35,000 photographs now.
That's a lot of photos! :-o
Didn't I say that I took about 2,500 photographs last month? I've had the G3 for nearly a year now
and I've probably been taking a lot more photos than I used to. I used to estimate an average of
2,000 photos a year or thereabouts, but I've just taken more than that in one month. It's possible
that my collection numbers nearer 40,000 now then!
Once I get my photos reasonably well sorted I'll make a better estimate. I may even get an accurate
count one day.
Quoted message said:Yes, the scanner is definitely your priority then. How much is it, about a grand?
£900
Quoted message said:In work, we have a HP ScanJet 5470C flatbed scanner, and it's fine for scanning photos. It came
with a transparency adaptor, and even at 2400dpi, the output is [censored]!
It's not a proper film scanner. Mainly good for prints. Should be okay for medium format and large
format, but 35mm it too small for a flatbed, even with a high res like that.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:I really don't understand why so many people rely on auto, it's just sheer laziness IMO, and most
of the time auto gets it wrong anyway!
I mostly use Aperture Priority now (does that count?)
Not really, it's still auto, but at least it makes you aware of what the aperture is.
Quoted message said:Though I was taking a shot at the weekend, and it was coming out too bright. So I changed it into
Manual and manually changed the aperture to f8 and the shutter speed to a slightly shorter speed.
See, I'm learning! ;o)
Good! Here's a tip. When you go out to take photos, assuming that the light is fairly stable, start
by taking a few test shots (in manual mode) to determine the best exposure, then save that to one of
your custom settings. From then on, every time you turn your camera on with it on that custom
setting, the exposure will probably be correct, or just require a slight adjustment. So using manual
doesn't mean that you have to calculate the exposure for every single shot, only when the light
changes or you take a different kind of shot (like shooting into the light or in a dark shadow).
Quoted message said:I *never* use the full Auto mode,
Good, that's the idiot mode, and it only saves in jpeg format.
Quoted message said:or the P Mode (what's the point in the P mode?),
It seems to be a more intelligent auto mode. For one thing, I think you can turn flash on or off
whereas auto decides for you. With shutter or aperture priority, although the aperture or shutter is
decided automatically, it may sometimes result in over or underexposure because it can't alter the
aperture or shutter enough. With P mode it alters both of them.
Quoted message said:but I do sometimes use the Portrait and Landscape scene modes. I know these aren't manual, but
after seeing the results, I can tell you that they are more or less an aperture priorty mode (with
Portrait being f2, and landscape being f8), depending on the light.
Yep, they are effectively aperture priority with fixed apertures.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:A 10D with an equivalent lens would cost nearly twice as much!
I know, but after the £1250, I could have bought a cheap second hand lens and then saved for the
other lens on a rolling basis.
But your cheap second hand lens wouldn't be very wide at all. A typical cheap zoom might be 28-
something mm, which would equate to 45-something mm. So you wouldn't have a wide angle lens, and
trust me, you'd miss it! The ultra-wide lenses necessary for digital SLR's are very expensive.
Quoted message said:But to be honest, it would have worked out expensive, I know. ...but after the initial purchases,
I'm sure I wouldn't notice the extras, just the same way that I haven't noticed the extras I've
bought for the G5...
But the extras for the G5 are very cheap by comparison. Extras for SLRs can be very expensive, some
lenses can cost more than the camera.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:So there's really *no* reason to use fancy auto modes at all.
There's always the reason of convenience on certain occasions.
Like when a black labrador is running around? ;-)
Quoted message said:I have no problems with noise on my G5,
You probably don't fiddle with your photos as much as me then! ;-)
Quoted message said:I know that extra noise at ISO 100 isn't very good, but the review also says: "Overall the G5 has
the sharpest image with the most detail, it also has the least amount of sharpening artifacts
(such as halos around dark detail)." So surely, it's a balance of personal preference between
noise and detail?
Yep, I'd agree with that.
Quoted message said:Plus, perhaps I should start turning the sharpening and saturation etc down to their lowest
settings like you do? To make it even better, and more pure for post-processing?
After some experimentation I decided to stick to normal contrast and saturation, I just set it to
"Low Sharpening" now. The contrast and saturation are fine in most images, I could always go back
and reduce them for a specific image if necessary (one of the benefits of using RAW mode).
Quoted message said:So noise-free plus extra detail? That's the perfect compromise then isn't it? ;o)
Yeah, and the interesting thing about being able to shoot at high film speed with virtually no noise
is that I'd be able to use fast shutter speeds on waterfalls and still get the quality and depth of
field of a small aperture. Should please Bernard.
Paul
--
The October Project 2003
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukoctober.htmlOpen ↗
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗
