wedding shoot

Douglas wrote:

Nearly every time I get a customer who owns a DSLR, I get a lecture on how
much they know and precisely how to handle their images. 60% of the time the
images I handle exactly as they specify are not acceptable to them for any
number of reasons including focus. It seems I Un-focus their images in the
process of printing them without manipulation! Curious, isn't it?

I send in my DSLR images via the web to two stores. They've been edited
by me for the printer at the photo store (except printer/paper color
profile, but to date that has not been a problem with printer #1).
They've been USM'd for the print size as well. My instructions are
always: "Don't change anything/print as is". For printer #1, no problem
at all. For printer #2 (a different store), there is a slight magenta cast.

As to sharpness, no problem, but again I spend time with the USM to get
it right at each print size. I get the impression that many people have
not spent the time to learn to use USM properly and/or they use the
simple "sharpen" filter which is a hit or miss proposition.




--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

"Ken Tough" wrote in message
news

I wouldn't say that's a case of dSLR owners having too high
expectations or being a bunch of complainers, more likely that they
simply notice the lack of sharpness on print as opposed to on-screen.
[As you would]. You could suggest to them that they apply a little
sharpening [USM] before printing. I'm sure printers of negatives
get just as many proportional gripes from SLR 35mm as opposed to
p&s 35mm.

The P&S digital people are happy with their prints, because there is
less chance of major failure than with film. Digital is a better
"catchall" because it can up the ISO or adjust contrast to meet
the shot automatically. P&S shooters would only notice that there
are less crap shots than normal. dSLR shooters would notice that
they weren't as good as they were led to believe by looking at
them on the screen.

That's my take on it, anyway.

--
Ken Tough

When Minolta released the now historical 7000 with auto focus, I remember a
customer coming back with underexposed flash shots taken in a park
complaining about the pictures. He said then "this camera wasn't cheap, you
know". I guess than sums it up. I've seen more good shots pass over my
counter from point and shoot cameras than from new owners with SLRs.

"Ken Tough" wrote in message
news

I wouldn't say that's a case of dSLR owners having too high
expectations or being a bunch of complainers, more likely that they
simply notice the lack of sharpness on print as opposed to on-screen.
[As you would]. You could suggest to them that they apply a little
sharpening [USM] before printing. I'm sure printers of negatives
get just as many proportional gripes from SLR 35mm as opposed to
p&s 35mm.

The P&S digital people are happy with their prints, because there is
less chance of major failure than with film. Digital is a better
"catchall" because it can up the ISO or adjust contrast to meet
the shot automatically. P&S shooters would only notice that there
are less crap shots than normal. dSLR shooters would notice that
they weren't as good as they were led to believe by looking at
them on the screen.

That's my take on it, anyway.

--
Ken Tough

When Minolta released the now historical 7000 with auto focus, I remember a
customer coming back with underexposed flash shots taken in a park
complaining about the pictures. He said then "this camera wasn't cheap, you
know". I guess than sums it up. I've seen more good shots pass over my
counter from point and shoot cameras than from new owners with SLRs.

"Ken Tough" wrote in message
news

I wouldn't say that's a case of dSLR owners having too high
expectations or being a bunch of complainers, more likely that they
simply notice the lack of sharpness on print as opposed to on-screen.
[As you would]. You could suggest to them that they apply a little
sharpening [USM] before printing. I'm sure printers of negatives
get just as many proportional gripes from SLR 35mm as opposed to
p&s 35mm.

The P&S digital people are happy with their prints, because there is
less chance of major failure than with film. Digital is a better
"catchall" because it can up the ISO or adjust contrast to meet
the shot automatically. P&S shooters would only notice that there
are less crap shots than normal. dSLR shooters would notice that
they weren't as good as they were led to believe by looking at
them on the screen.

That's my take on it, anyway.

--
Ken Tough

When Minolta released the now historical 7000 with auto focus, I remember a
customer coming back with underexposed flash shots taken in a park
complaining about the pictures. He said then "this camera wasn't cheap, you
know". I guess than sums it up. I've seen more good shots pass over my
counter from point and shoot cameras than from new owners with SLRs.

"Occasionally I get
people sent by mini labs for recovery of lost or damaged data on their
cards. "

another reason not to go digital.
I've heard of film being exposed.
up to 24 shots could be lost, but not 200+!

"Occasionally I get
people sent by mini labs for recovery of lost or damaged data on their
cards. "

another reason not to go digital.
I've heard of film being exposed.
up to 24 shots could be lost, but not 200+!

"Matt Clara" wrote in message
.. .
"Paul Bielec" wrote in message
...
Mr.Bolshoy Huy wrote:

both English and Polish...something around "Russian dick"...

--nope, a big one, but we all know Russians have bigger than Poles.

Did ya hear the one about the Polish astronaut who got left behind on
the Moon?

Nope

Well, I can't finish that one, but did you hear about the poles who were
planning to fly to the sun? When asked if that was safe due to the heat,
they explained they'd make the trip at night... (ba dump dump, TISH)

No offense--I don't really believe any race/nationality is inferior to any
other. Republicans, now, that's another question altogether...
;-)

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com

"Matt Clara" wrote in message
.. .
"Paul Bielec" wrote in message
...
Mr.Bolshoy Huy wrote:

both English and Polish...something around "Russian dick"...

--nope, a big one, but we all know Russians have bigger than Poles.

Did ya hear the one about the Polish astronaut who got left behind on
the Moon?

Nope

Well, I can't finish that one, but did you hear about the poles who were
planning to fly to the sun? When asked if that was safe due to the heat,
they explained they'd make the trip at night... (ba dump dump, TISH)

No offense--I don't really believe any race/nationality is inferior to any
other. Republicans, now, that's another question altogether...
;-)

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com

"Matt Clara" wrote in message
.. .
"Paul Bielec" wrote in message
...
Mr.Bolshoy Huy wrote:

both English and Polish...something around "Russian dick"...

--nope, a big one, but we all know Russians have bigger than Poles.

Did ya hear the one about the Polish astronaut who got left behind on
the Moon?

Nope

Well, I can't finish that one, but did you hear about the poles who were
planning to fly to the sun? When asked if that was safe due to the heat,
they explained they'd make the trip at night... (ba dump dump, TISH)

No offense--I don't really believe any race/nationality is inferior to any
other. Republicans, now, that's another question altogether...
;-)

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com

"Paul Bielec" wrote in message
...
Mr.Bolshoy Huy wrote:

both English and Polish...something around "Russian dick"...

--nope, a big one, but we all know Russians have bigger than Poles.

Did ya hear the one about the Polish astronaut who got left behind on
the Moon?

Nope

Well, I can't finish that one, but did you hear about the poles who were
planning to fly to the sun? When asked if that was safe due to the heat,
they explained they'd make the trip at night... (ba dump dump, TISH)

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com