Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Konica Minolta

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 4, 2002, 12:01 AM   #51
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Sanpete

It's a myth, we're all here to delude you and steal your hard earned $1000!

My recomendation to you is first, download Phil's pictures and print them. If you still like them, then take a flash to the camera store and snap several pictures @ the standard setting then change the camera to soft(-), then again play with the contrast wheel from (0 to -3). Take the pictures home then again print them.

But then again may be Minolta have added the adjustment wheels to the camera just for fun! But in my opinion you already have a bad inkling for this camera, and I would not recommend it...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2002, 12:11 AM   #52
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

NHL:
It's just a paradox, that you have to find a PS plugin for your camera to make the pics look like pics from another camera.
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2002, 12:18 AM   #53
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Klaus

That's why I suggest that scheme to you (Nikon owners)... Personally I make it the way I like, and that what the flexibilities of all the D7's are all about!

BTW I did say canonized and...
http://www.stevesforums.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=4327
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2002, 12:31 AM   #54
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

Sanpete,

in all reality to push the limits of a 5MP digicam really doesnt take that much effort whether it be a Minolta, Nikon or some other mfgr. a lot of people feel that 5mp is equal to 35mm film. i for one feel that is inaccurate info. you want a definitive answer to will it make a difference if you push the limit of the camera. in some peoples eyes yes in others no. i say that a certain other camera oversaturates colors which would affect its limits too. it also regularly blows out the highlites which also affects detail. it's all proveable too. and it isn't affecting those users. we can whip out our color spectrum analyzers and our pantone color chips and start a whole new issue on that. but you know what you and to a lesser extent DK want and arent getting(and i believe DK is truely interested in the camera so i give him leeway there) you have all the facts you need to not bother with this camera yet you return and quote the dpreview and i don't have a clue why. your not getting the answer you want. the limits of the camera are in the hands of the user. if you see the noise and feel its in your way its not for you. i think the subject is moot.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2002, 12:47 AM   #55
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

klaus DK and to all on this fools quest

remember when you could choose what film you put in a camera? and the results such as K64 or velvia could be the same as was on any camera. this is where digital stinks. we have to choose a camera for it's color spectrum or other attributes instead of a roll of film. now we are all locked into one type of film a piece. and these wasted discussions.

this issue will start all over again in about a year when cmos eliminates the ccd in digicams and someone finds something wrong there too.

i love technology. it bring the world together.

to all have a good evening.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2002, 7:00 AM   #56
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 33
Default

"if you go back and read this thread from the beginning I think you'll be able to see the point. The camera has a problem with noise, more than others in its class. You and a couple others basically denied this"

I dont agree. The camera doesnt have a problem with noise. The camera doesnt care. The people who have the D7i have a problem with the noise.

It isnt a matter of 'problem', it is a way the 7i handles the noise inavoidably present (a CCD has noise, period, some other cams with the same CCD have 'different' ways of handling it, thats all).

What my point was / is, is all the screaming posts about it.

Its just a matter of taste. Personally, I have no problem with the noise, as long as exposure is spot on together with the contrast / sharpning settings, I printed to A3 format with great results.

It's also common knowledge that some of the other camera's have color problems, for example to bright red's to name an example.

No problem. It's known. It's known as a 'aspect of the camera', and I simply didnt buy that camera for that reason. Some love the 'high' colors, some dont. Thats almost never screamed about. Those who dont like it dont buy it. Simple as that.

With the 7i's images, should be same thing. They have a 'look' to them. Call it 'noisy' (I find the semi-'noiseless' filtered images from other cams too 'electronic' to my eye), call it whatever you want. But look at the images, download samples from sites like this. Have them printed, not satisfied? Buy another cam. Easy as that.

Personally (just another example), I saw CP5700 images (the church shots in comparison to 7i, I think it was on dcresource.com or so), that I find really really unacceptable. Not because of noise, resolution, or whatever, just because of the horrible lens (in my opinion). When looking at the lights in these shots, the 7i renders a beautifull, chroma-abberation free 'star'. The cp5700 shots showed deformed 'star', with horrid cromatic abberations. No biggy to me. I wanted excellent glass, I opted for another cam. No need for me to buy a CP and then start a "Croma abberation, Croma abberation, Croma abberation" thread in the nikon forum. I think the 5700 has some excellent points, just not where I needed them.

By the way, the way I get my shots ready for large (a3 size) prints:

Taking an image:

- 'Soft' cam setting
- 100 iso fixed
- Always manual WB from a whitecard
- Adjust contrast for optimum tonal distribution, keeping a keen eye on the previewed image & histogram.
- Natural color most of the times, vivid color occasionally
- Adjust color filtering

p.s. sounds like much work, but often need only to do this as preparation for the 1st shot. Consecutive shots in the same lighting environment dont require doing it time and time again.

- If of static subject & using tripod, I bracket -1 +1 exposures & selectivly overlay them later in p.s. to get film-like exposure lattitude.

Then the digital darkroom:

- DO NOT DO THE AUTO-LEVELS THING IN P.S. (color & tonal distribution should be okay if you exposed correctly!!!)
- If needed, I use a slight S curve in 'Curves' on 'all channels' if needed. Where the 2 points in the S curve are is 'usually 10% from the 'left' and 10% from the right.
- Do a smart blur, settings 'on-demand', keeping an eye on 2 zoomed patched of the image, one full of detail, the other a 'should be clear' but 'seems noisy' part. To find the 'balance' point.
- Convert the image to LAB
- Duplicate the layer to a layer called ('overlay 1')
- overlay: Gaussian blur, radius between 1.5 to 3 depending on image, threshold depending on image (making shure not to lose detail)
- overlay: brightness / contrast, decrease brightness a bit, increase contrast a bit.
- overlay: Opacity between 15-30%, depending on image
- Background layer: select luminance channel only
- Background layer: sharpen (radius between 1.2 and 2, amount between 50 and 110%, threshold depending on image, making shure no hard halo's occur).
- Merge visible layers

voila. Gives me 12"x16" (or 30x40cm, or A3) size images. Are they tack-sharp? no, would need a 4x5" slide to make an enlargement that big tack sharp. But certainly good enough for me to make sellable images.

For enlargements of 12"x16" and above, for some images its benefitial to actuall add grain... Here's what I mean:

Some images look better if interpolated to about 240dpi, do this is a few steps, that will look (although hardly distinguisable) bit betten then done in 1 step of bicub interpollation.

After this, use the 'film-grain' filter,usually 'lower' settings, like grain, highlight and intensity set to '1'. This will increas the contrast in the highlights, so compensate for that by keeping the highlight somewhat dimmer then usual in the previous steps. This gives a more pleasing 'film-like' results to some eyes, although some wont like it. But I like the way it (A) can make small highlight area's (where the bright spots usually are printed as 1 white tone), more 'alive' and (B) removes the 'digital' 'blotchy' look from enlarged pixels.

Much work? Yes. Do I do it for all shots? No. (so then it's not so much work). Only the shots I really think are winners and that are enlarged to 8x10 and above. I can live with the work, I like having optimum image data, unfiltered for noise or anything, and do my own thing, to my likings & preferences.

Not that much has changed when moving from film to digital. A lot of the 'end-result' is still in the prints! Good printing (these days, not selecting the right developer, paper etc. but selecting the right image area, feather, filter etc.) is half the photo. Proper exposure beforehand is the other half.

Anyhow, hope this helps anybody, or at least, gives inspiration to experiment.

Ow yeah, one last thing, get to know your printer or printing service. I usually had prints from the same service on kodak royal paper. I recently did some tests, and adjusted my p.s. work on it. My prints have dramatically improved.

Example: the printer used by them only could show RGB gradations (compared to my RGB originals) into the 230,230,230 range. So in print, 230,230,230 looked the same as 250,250,250.

Knowing that has impact on my selecting the contrast / exposure on the 7i, and the work done in p.s.

Just naming a few things to consider... anyhow, getting carried away....

All have fun and keep shooting
fotograafdigi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2002, 7:39 AM   #57
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

fotograafdigi!

My God! I'm being more and more happy with my cp5700.
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2002, 7:47 AM   #58
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

To SJMS:

Instead of this wasted discussion (as you wrote) why not make a negative/positive list on the 7hi - as YOU see it - not as Phil or Steves reviews ? But it has to be an honest list and not a battle against Nikon or Sonys digicams! Try not to mention them!!! :idea:

A good evening to you too.
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2002, 10:24 AM   #59
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 33
Default Happy with 5700

@klaus

Okay, I see your point!

B.t.w. the 'long story' applies for ALL sources that I digitally process images from, from scanner, 7i, 4x5", 6x6, olympus 2100, scanned 35mm negatives/prints, etc. So its not 7i 'caused' (except for the pre-exposure steps of course, and these are there because I want optimum results, not P&S results).

So, that story making you more and more happy with your 5700 doesnt make any sense to me, although im happy that you are, maybe I just misintrepreted that.

And yes, I'm a digital darkroom addict no matter what input source I use, I just love to fiddle around with it

b.t.w. the link on the bottom of your post really shows some great shots!
fotograafdigi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 4, 2002, 10:42 AM   #60
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default The Beauty of Digital

sjms

Quote:
this is where digital stinks
not quite. Like everyone here have righly so observed digital always involves two parts: Hardware - the lens and the CCD, and Software - The Nikon vs the Minolta ways.

One can get a boxed K64(Nikon) or a Velvia(Minolta) output and use theses as they come and argue all days over the demerits of each or profit from the digital: Either camera manufacturers has left the door open to the few creative people by giving us access to their raw... With access to the raw output from the CCD, everyone already has access to the basic raw ingredients, so why not roll out your own IlfordChrome? The hardware is fixed, but the software part is optional. Ironically Sony choose to close this option for their owner over the Minolta and Nikon that used their very own CCD!



fotograafdigi

Thanks for the tip!
Quote:
If of static subject & using tripod, I bracket -1 +1 exposures & selectivly overlay them later in p.s. to get film-like exposure lattitude.
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:08 PM.