Stuart Mann said:Quoted message said:But cursing the fact that you didn't buy enough flash card memory!
Yes - 32Mb doesn't go far, does it.
You still only have that? I hardly ever used it, it only held 7 raw shots. In fact I threw in my two
128 meg cards to sweeten the deal when I sold my G3, I really didn't want them any more, too small,
only equivalent to half a roll of film each with my new camera.
Quoted message said:I haven't done my price research on memory yet, but I calculated on buying a lot more. How
important is the speed of the card in a G5 - is the card the rate limiting step for
reading/writing or is it the camera? Have you noticed any speed difference between differently
specified cards on your G3, Paul?
No. Not that I've really paid much attention. I'm sure I'd notice a difference if I did a proper
test, but card writing speed has never been a factor worth worrying about with landscape
photography. I recently bought a 512 meg Ultra card, but I haven't noticed any difference. It's
actually a lot slower to download images to my computer, so the extra file size (7MB compared to
4MB) is more significant than the supposedly faster card speed.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Don't forget to charge the battery and use RAW mode!!! (Even if you don't think you need it yet
you'll regret it when you realise why you should have been using it from the start).
Thanks - I haven't got my head around that side of things yet so I appreciate your advice. Do you
use the PS7 plugin from Adobe for RAW files, or is there another way of handling them to get
images into PS?
The software that comes with the camera provides a reasonable, if basic, method of converting raw
files to tiffs. Photoshop CS has the raw converter built in. There's probably not that much
difference since you've got all the power you need to change them in Photoshop. It's only a 36 bit
image stored in a 48 bit format, so there's plenty of leeway.
My advice about raw is to use it in preference to jpeg if possible (but you'll need a reasonable
amount of compact flash memory before you have the luxury of being able to do that), even if you
don't understand why at the moment. I'm very glad that some of my early shots were saved in raw
format. I'm equally unglad that some of them weren't.
The G series cameras have a nice feature that allows you to take jpegs as the default, but with the
option of saving as raw after you've taken a shot if you press the function button before the review
time runs out. Since I always set the review to "infinite" or whatever it's called, I had time to
study each shot before deciding whether to save it as raw or not. Once I got more memory that ceased
to be an issue, I simply saved everything in raw format.
Nowadays my increased file size means that I have to be very careful with the mere 768 meg of memory
that I have. I've decided that it's better to take fewer photographs in raw mode than to increase my
capacity by using those crappy jpegs. I just refuse to use that low quality [censored] anymore. ;-)
Disclaimer: For those who like to use jpegs I should stress that this strategy is okay if you aren't
inclined to post process your images. Saving as jpegs for direct printing is acceptable, but you
have to make sure that the exposure etc. is pretty much as you want in-camera. Post processing a
jpeg does cause image quality to deteriorate.
Paul
--
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukwildwales.fsnet.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗
