• Photography Index • Home • .
. Digital Toolbox
Peter Kun Frary
A serious photographer desires control over his or her image during and after the exposure. In the past, controlling your images after exposure meant maintaining a messy and bulky darkroom. Today, digital imaging gives you the benefits of a darkroom with a lot less mess. To get started, you'll need a reasonably fast computer, plenty of hard drive storage, a calibrated monitor, a color printer, a film scanner and/or digital camera and image editing software.
Wailua Falls, Kauai • EOS A2, EF 28-105 USM, Bogan Tripod, Elite Chrome & Canon FS4000US
Don't let the marketing clowns fool you. Digital imaging is tweaky, unless, of course, you're not discriminating about image quality. You should love working with images if you plan to use a digital darkroom. In other words, learning to scan, edit and print images is expensive and time consuming. Although DSLRs are less tweaky than film scans, you still need to learn to adjust your images for best results. A causal photographer who merely wants a few prints for display and albums should stick with traditional photo labs.
I love to tweak, even if I don't need to. I guess it's my musical background that makes me obsessive with details. Like my camera kit, it took me years to build my digital darkroom. If you had to buy all the hardware components at once, the cost would be overwhelming for all but the most well-heeled shoppers. Here's my digital toolbox.
Hardware Apple Macintosh Dual Processor G4 MDD (2004): Macintosh OS 9.2.2 & 10.4.8.11 (Tiger), dual 1.25 GHz G4 processors, 2 GB RAM, 5 PCI slots, 320GB Barracuda SATA II hard drive, two 320 GB La Cie External Firewire 800 hard drives (stripped RAID), My Book 500GB (backup), SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW), La Cie External 52x Firewire CD-R/CD-RW, La Cie External Firewire LightScribe (DVD-R/CD-RW), Sansdisk Firewire CF Card Reader, Adaptec Ultra SCSI PCI card (for film scanner), IOGear USB 2 PCI card, OWC Firewire 800 PCI card, SeriTek 1S2 PCI SATA Controller, Kensington Expert Mouse (USB trackball), IOGear Bluetooth, ATI Radeon 9600 Pro video card (256MB VRAM) and 23" Apple Cinema Display.
Apple Macintosh Dual Processor G4 MDD & Cinema Display
This Mirror Drive Doors G4 is a peppy and stable Photoshop crunching machine. It was released during the dawn of the G5 era and, thus, is the last of the long running G4 tower series. It's made in the USA, refreshing in this day of imported, job stealing, profit maximizing, techno products. I could have gotten a G5 for the same price, but two G4 processors are faster in Photoshop than a single G5 machine. Also I wanted OS 9 compatibility. Plus, the G5 (& MacPro) looks like a motorcycle engine!
A desktop tower has one main advantage over all-in-ones like the iMac or laptops: expandability. This expandability gives you a few years of "future proofing." If I had a 2004 iMac or iBook I would have upgraded to a new computer by now. However the 5 PCI slots allow me to add additional features as I need them, e.g., USB 2, Firewire 800, SATA and Ultra SCSI. Thus I can use both legacy and new gear without a hitch. Buying a new computer is expensive enough without having to upgrade printers, scanners and outboard audio gear. Also, desktop towers have the ability to run dual monitors and house additional optical and hard drives.
The G4 MMD is the last Mac able to boot OS 9.2. And, yes, I was an OS 9 diehard but eventually succumbed to OS 10. OS 10.39 is an extremely stable operating system, and, unfortunately, I can't say the same for some of the Tiger (10.4x) variations. I should have left well enough alone and avoided Tiger, but I wanted to try Adobe LightRoom and it requires Tiger. The other bummer about early Tiger variants is terrible Classic compatibility. Basically Classic starts and crashes. And it brings down the entire machine, not just Classic. Classic under Panther was usable for most programs and relatively stable. If Classic crashed, Panther was still operational and allowed me to reboot Classic. Alas, I can still boot under OS 9.2.2 but having a usable Classic mode was handy.
In fairness, Tiger increased stability with most updates. OS 10.46 was the first stable Tiger update and added deep sleep support to my IOGear USB 2 card. Now I can leave an iPod or flash drive mounted without crashing during sleep. OS 10.47 broke my USB 2 card! Devices left plugged in crashed the computer during sleep. Even worse, the card didn't work when I woke the computer. OS 10.48 was fairly stable and had no deep sleep problems with any of my PCI cards or external hardware. OS 10.49 is the devil and I immediately reverted back to 10.48. Apple finally got it right with OS 10.4.11, the final Tiger version. And, Halleluia, Classic works like a champ! I can actually run MOTU Mosaic (an ancient music notation app) as well as most OS 9 apps. Even many apps designed for OS 7 and 8 run and print fine.
Tall Ship Reflection at Aloha Tower • EOS 5D & EF 50 1.4 USM
The ability to burn DVD-R disks is a great feature. With 4.7GB per DVD, you can squeeze in a lot of images compared to the puny 700MB CDs. Nevertheless, a second fast CD burner is essential if you do lots of CD duplication. Using one burner is no fun! You'll want to use Toast for CD duplication. Apple's burning utility is limited and iTunes is a pain in the arse.
Although I can hear a MacPro calling me, I don't find my G4 MDD slow or wanting for photo editing or web design. PhotoShop, Digital Photo Professional and Dreamweaver are still nimble and smooth. Amazingly audio editing with Bias Peak and AudioDesk have also continued to be fast and able. Of course maxing out RAM and a fast hard drive made a huge difference in performance. My G4 feels faster than my 2007 MacBook Pro at most demanding tasks such as image and audio crunching.
The Apple 20" Cinema Display is the best monitor I have used. It beats the poop out of most LCD and CRTs in terms of dynamic range, sharpness, brightness and color accuracy. Plus, the Cinema Display has consistent color and contrast at nearly any viewing angle and runs cool as a cucumber, unlike the aluminum case Cinema Displays or iMacs. Moreover, the first generation aluminum 20" model isn't as bright and sharp as the older one and contrast changes slightly as you move your head. Of course the new 30" Cinema Display is excellent, albeit hot to the touch.
Alas, after 3 years of constant use the backlight inverter board in my 20" Cinema Display died. The dreaded blinking power light and dim screen. Apple quoted me $400-500 for the repair so I bought a new 23" Aluminum Cinema Display (2nd generation). Yes, the increased screen space (1920 x 1200 pixels) and brightness are welcome, but it runs hot and lacks the ultra wide viewing angle of the old 20" Cinema Display. Nevertheless, images seen from within its viewing angle are stunning. And I like the adjustable tilt and small footprint.
Apple 23" Cinema Display
I probably should have waited on the 23" Aluminum Cinema Display but had a pressing deadline. Changing the inverter board yourself is easy and only takes 20 minutes and $85 for the part and shipping. With the new board, it's as sharp and bright as a new one. Now I have two Cinema Displays and am in hog heaven. If you find your Cinema Display with a dim view, follow these backlight inverter board replacement instructions.
Apple Macintosh MacBook Pro (2007): Macintosh OS 10.4.11 (Tiger), 2.16 GHz CoreDuo 2 processors, 2 GB RAM, 160GB hard drive, SuperDrive (DVD-R/CD-RW) and 15" display. The MacBook Pro is my backup and travel computer so it rarely sees hard use. It's a jim dandy computer but is somewhat overrated. After all the hype I figured it would blow the doors off my old G4 MDD Dual. Nope. Although initial startup is faster, it feels about the same running Intel native code software like iTunes 7.6, Safari or Digital Photo Professional 3x. Unfortunately running PowerPC apps under Rosetta is painfully slow. Did I mention it was slow? Even my American Heritage Dictionary app ran much slower. I heard the MacBook Pro (Core Duo 2) under Rosetta whips the best PowerBook G4. Not the case for duo processor desktops. And importing Wav or AIFF files into iTunes is slow compared to my G4 desktop (probably due to the slow DVD/CD used on laptops).
Apple MacBook Pro
Although the MacBook Pro has a nice screen as far as laptops go, it falls short for photo editing. Why? The color and contrast change with angle of view. In other words, move your neck a couple inches and the image looks totally different. The good news is you can connect a Cinema Display to the MacBook Pro and all is well.
One more nickpick. This thing runs hot. Really hot. I've had my MacBook Pro shutdown after several hours of hard editing in Digital Photo Professional. The fans were screaming and zap it was down for the count. The balmy climate of Hawaii is no friend to computers. I had to pull the battery to get it to reboot after cool-down. At least I figured out how to keep it cool enough not to shutdown: leave the lip open (it was closed while connected to a Cinema Display) and put it on a stand so air can circulate under it. After I did those two things it never overheated again.
With all that said, I could live with the MacBook Pro as my only computer if I upgraded most of my apps to native intel code and docked it to a Cinema Display and fleet of hard drives.
Why do I use the Macintosh? In 1984 I was writing my my master's thesis and needed a computer for word processing, music notation and graphics. Windows didn't exist yet and most graduate students wrote dissertations on a typewriter. Primitive times! Microsoft just released Word 1.0, a "professional" word processor for the Mac. Word was a breakthrough as it created footnotes, pagination, varied margins, etc., that met academic standards. I took one confused look at an IBM DOS computer and quickly bought a Mac ($3000) due to its graphical interface and available software. I also bought the original LaserWriter for $5000!
Today, the Mac is the professional standard in graphics, web design, prepress, video and image editing, education and music. One of the reasons Macs dominate the graphics industry is that Apple's ColorSync software is extremely effective in calibrating and matching the colors in your monitor, scanner and printer. If your images are important to you, why settle for anything less than the best?
The Mac OS is extremely polished and elegant as Apple has continually tweaked and refined the design since 1983. Moreover, the Mac is the easiest computer to operate, is plug and play with most devices and has one of the lowest failure rates in the computer industry.
Canon EOS 5D
Canon EOS 3, 5D & 40D SLR cameras: Although most modern SLRs are excellent and will take great pictures in competent hands, the actual choice of camera is a personal decision. Does the camera feel comfortable in your hands? Are the controls logical? Is the viewfinder clear and vivid? Does the system of lenses and accessories fit your needs? Only you can answer these questions. I can tell you I'm mainly a Canon shooter. I've used the EOS system since 1990 and have owned most of the mid-range cameras, several of the pro models and over 30 lenses. Prior to 1990 I shot Nikon and still have a FM3A and a half dozen lenses for an nostalgic kick. I won't go into detail here, but suffice to say Canon is a great system and has given me few reasons to want or need more. If you'd like to know more about Canon camera equipment, read my gear reviews.
Canon Canoscan FS4000US (2001). 4000 DPI 42-bit 35 mm film scanner.It's a looker too.
After the death of my LS-1000, I purchased a Canoscan FS4000US. The superior image quality of the FS4000US compared to the LS-1000 was immediately apparent. The higher resolution (4000 x 5888 pixels at 4000 DPI and 42-bits), greater dynamic range, auto scratch removal (FARE) and extremely accurate exposure and color adjustments really set the FS4000US apart from the LS-1000. In other words, it produced surprisingly sharp and vivid scans of slides and negatives. However, a 4000 dpi/42 bit scan yields a 125 MB image file, e.g., over 23 million pixels! Fortunately, there's a lot more information in a 4000 dpi/42 bit scan compared to a 2700 dpi/36 bit scan, so the size is worth it. I rescanned many of my old images and was shocked at the increased detail and dynamic range compared to the LS-1000. You can always rez down if needed.
Aloha Tower View • EOS Elan 7E, EF 28-135 3.5-5.6, Elite Chrome& FS4000US Scanner
Scans from the FS4000US require only minor tweaking, at least with NPH, Portra, Sensia and Provia (I haven't tried many other emulsions yet). Portra 160VR scans especially well, not only because little tweaking is needed, but because of its ultra fine grain (much finer than Portra 400), saturated colors and moderately low contrast. Plus, FARE works amazingly well at removing scratches from images. Unlike other scratch removal products, there is little or no image degradation. This feature has spared me from endless "spotting" of old negs in Photoshop. All in all, my Photoshop chores have diminished considerably because of the FS4000US.
Although I mainly shoot with a DSLR (20D and 5D), I have 30 years of negs and chromes to scan, so a film scanner will be essential for years to come. The Canon FS4000US is a nice blend of quality, convenience and economy and is worth every penny of the $800 I spent on it. However it is discontinued and the Nikon Cool Scan series are probably your best bet if you're in the market.
Click here for a detailed review of the Canon FS4000US Film Scanner.
Epson Perfection 2400 Photo (2003). 2400 DPI 48-bit flatbed scanner with film adapter and USB 2.0 connection.
I was planning to replace my old Umax with the Epson 2450 or 3200 flatbed scanner. However, I purchased an Epson Perfection 2400 Photo at Costco for $140 instead. Sheesh, flatbed scanners have improved big time in the last 5 years!
The superior image quality of the Epson 2400 compared to my old Umax 1200S was apparent after only one scan. The higher resolution (2400 x 4800 DPI and 48-bits) and greater dynamic range set the Epson 2400 apart from the Umax 1200S and on par with some low end film scanners. In other words, it produced reasonably sharp and vivid scans of line art, prints, slides and negatives. Notice I said slides and negatives. The 2400 has built-in 35mm film scanning via an illuminator in the lid and a mask/film holder. I was surprised at the quality of the film scans. Although not nearly as sharp and detailed as the Canon FS4000US, sharpness isn't too far behind my old Nikon LS-1000. Moreover, auto exposure and color accuracy are almost as good as the FS4000US and much better than the LS-1000. Unfortunately, dynamic range is extremely narrow compared to dedicated film scanners, so forget about scanning contrasty scenes. Scans are more saturated than average (good for my taste) and have a slight magenta tint.
I found chromes scan a little better than negatives, i.e., less tweaks needed. Fuji negatives, especially NPH, scan better than Kodak negatives, e.g., Portra 400VC. Kodachrome sides don't scan very well. The blacks are too dense for this scanner and make for a muddy scan.
Diskman in Waikiki • Canon EOS A2, EF 300 4L USM, Sensia 100, Epson Perfection 2400 Photo. This is my first scan on the 2400. I was surprised at the excellent color and tonality as this chrome scanned poorly on my LS-1000.
After a couple months the inside surface of the glass became foggy due to outgassing. Scans were becoming increasingly murky. Although the manual says not to disassemble the scanner, it's easy to remove the glass for cleaning. After cleaning it worked just like new. I had the same outgassing problem with an old Umax flatbed too.
The software package installs on Mac OS 8.6, 9.x and Windows 98, 2000, ME and XP. Mac OS X is supported, but only in Classic mode. However, a native OS 10.x driver is now available on the Epson website. The package includes the Epson Twain Driver, Epson Smart Panel and Photoshop Elements 1.0. The best part is Photoshop Elements, an excellent program if you don't have Photoshop. The Twain driver operates within Smart Panel (an automated copy, scan, email center), Photoshop Elements or Photoshop. The driver does an excellent job in auto mode, but manual mode is poor compared to the Umax or Nikon drivers I'm used to, but that's why they make Photoshop.
Dust and scratches are less apparent with the 2400 compared to dedicated film scanners. This is a good thing as the 2400 lacks automated dust and scratch removal. Nevertheless, the 2400 isn't the best choice for restoring old negatives and chromes (I've had excellent results from Canon's FARE scratch removal algorithms). You should always use canned air or a bulb blower to remove dust from film before scanning.
Oh, and the photocopy/xerox mode is very handy albeit rather slow compared to a real photocopy machine.
For only $140 at Costco, this scanner was a steal! For causal hobbyists, this may be all the scanner they need. Epson upgrades these scanners regularly, so the latest model will always have a tiny improvement or two. Flatbed technology is pretty mature so don't expect earthshattering improvements. They mainly get cheaper.
For more scans from the Epson Perfection 2400 Photo, click on these links: 1. 2.
Epson Stylus Photo R800 (2004). Inkjet printer with 5760 x 1440 resolution and seven-color Ultrachrome High Gloss pigment ink cartridges (Magenta, Cyan, Yellow, Matte black, photo black, red, and blue) plus Gloss Optimizer cartridge. The R88 is a looker. The sliver-gray and black finish would complement a late model Mac G4 or G5 tower nicely (probably look nice next to a black Dell too).
My earlier Epson printers, Photo (1996) and Photo 1200 (1999), were a far cry from lab quality: I could see the dot pattern on close examination, fading was a constant problem and prints were fragile. The many faded inkjet prints on my wall bare witness to these unfortunate facts. However, Epson claims fade resistance and durability for the R800 comparable or exceeding lab prints. How can these claims be true? First, the R800 uses pigment based Ultrachrome ink. Ultrachrome has a higher fade-resistance than previous Epson dye based inks and does not exhibit metamerism. The R800 also has a Gloss Optimizer cartridge. The Gloss Optimizer applies a "clearcoat" over the surface of glossy prints. The clearcoat prevents bronzing and toughens up the surface. Thus, an image printed on Epson Premium Glossy Photo Paper looks, feels and smells like a traditional photographic print.
Yes, the grain structure on true photographic prints is finer, but you need a loupe to tell the difference. Only folks that use a loupe to decipher small details such as street signs may be disappointed. Magnify an inkjet print and you'll see a half tone pattern (like a magazine picture), but no additional visual detail. In contrast, an optical print reveals a surprising amount of hidden detail with high magnification. Incidentally, the dot pattern of the R800 is ultra even and fine compared to Epson printers of a few years ago (the 1.5 picoliter droplet size probably has a lot to do with this trait). To see the dot pattern, you need a 6 to 8 power loupe.
Nice Knockers • Brugges, Belgium • Canon EOS 40D, EF-s 17-55 2.8 IS USM.
I'm extremely pleased with the quality of R800 prints for display of 4 x 6, 5 x 7 and 8 x 10 inch images. I'd prefer to print a full frame 8 x 12, but Epson doesn't sell that size paper. The R800's largest print size is A4 and legal. Unfortunately, Premium Glossy Photo Paper isn't produced in those sizes. The R800 can also produce borderless 8.3 x 44 inch panoramic prints (using Premium Glossy Photo Roll Paper), but I haven't used that feature yet. However, this may be a way of forcing a full frame 8 x 12.
My only complaint is the print driver renders images a little darker than expected. My Mac is calibrated for 2.2 gamma and, if I set the driver to 1.8, the prints are fine. It's an easy fix but Epson should do better.
I don't save much over Kodalux or one hour labs by printing my own images. In fact, it costs more per print compared to Costco or Wallyworld. A set of cartridges runs you $120. If you make nothing but 8 x 10 prints, it goes really fast. A few dozen prints and you're done for. Epson Premium Glossy Photo Paper is about $.45 per 8 x 10 sheet. So, not considering the cost of equipment or your time, each 8 x 10 print costs about $2.00 in consumables. However, if you're skilled at PS tweaking and printing, your quality will rival a custom lab and save lots of money. Of course, you'll also have fun tweakin' and printing.
The R800 is a kickass photo printer. Like all inkjet printers, you have to use it regularly or the ink dries on the heads. If you mainly make modest sized prints, this printer delivers in spades. My main problem is I'm running out of wall space! If you need larger prints, the Epson R1800 has most of the features of the R800 in a bigger format.
I wrote a full review of the Epson R800 here.
Venetian Ceiling Detail • Canon EOS 10D, EF 17-40L USM.
Software
Adobe Photoshop. Image processing software
Photoshop is the only serious image editing software on the market. Don't even bother with Photoshop 5 LE. Adobe crippled it by removing the ability to adjust individual color channels, something you use everyday. However, any of the older "full" versions from version 3 on up will work fine, albeit without the bells and whistles of version 7, CS or CS2. I used Photoshop 3 for six years!
There are only two drawbacks to Photoshop: it costs $600 and takes a long time to learn due to its power and sophistication. If you're a causal hobbyist, consider the excellent, but less demanding, Adobe Photoshop Elements. For only $99 it has most of the tools amateur photographers need.
DreamWeaver MX. Web design software
I switched to this program after designing in Claris Home Page for last eight years. I really needed to let go of OS 9.2. I tried iWeb but it was a cruel joke. It couldn't open Home Page files and is extremely inflexible.Dreamweaver is extremely powerful but almost as easy to use as Home Page.
Emulsions for Scanning I shoot mostly chromes with Canon EOS cameras (my current fav is Provia 100F). As much as I like prints and computer monitor viewing of images, nothing beats the magic of seeing a chrome on a light table with a Schneider or other quality loupe. The minute detail and sparkling realism are amazing. Sunsets make me squint. Beautiful models make me drool. Everything else is compressed and flat in comparison. Here are some of the basic advantages of slide film over negative film:
Some emulsions scan better than others. For example, Provia 100F and 400F, Portra 160 and 400 (N, VC & UC) and Royal 100 and 400 have extremely fine grain and scan fairly easily, i.e., only require a small amount of color and contrast tweaking. The Portra emulsion family is especially easy to scan in my Nikon and Canon scanners. On the other hand, Kodachrome is a color adjustment nightmare and is almost impossible to get right (here's a Kodachrome scan). Elite Chrome is extremely contrasty and frequently requires masking or multiple layers to adjust highlight and shadow areas separately. Old Kodak Gold 400 negatives are grainy and have a heavy green cast, necessitating endless toil with noise and blur filters as well as extensive color adjustments. Kodak Max 400 is better, but only by a small margin.
- Chromes are first generation images--the actual film exposed in your camera--and, thus, exhibit optimal sharpness, color and contrast.
- The exposure represents the choice made by the photographer, not a print machine or operator.
- Filter effects, e.g., polarizers, are rendered accurately because they're not "corrected" by automatic printing machines.
- While working on an image in Photoshop, chromes are easier to match colors with than negatives because you may view them directly on a lightbox. In contrast, I can tell nothing about color from a negative and a print is a poor color guide (i.e., prints are interpretations of the negative by an automated print machine and/or teenager in a minilab).
I rarely get scratches on slide film, probably because chromes receive less processor handling than negatives. Unfortunately, scratching and fingerprints are common with negatives, especially when developed at minilabs. Kodak Gold and Max negs scratch easily, whereas Portra negs are less scratch prone.
Fremont Street Casino • Canon EOS 10D & EF 17-40L USM
The Work Routine
Viewing chromes on a light table is not a good way of sharing images with friends and family, so I scan my best chromes for web, email and printing. I use the Mac G4 MDD and Canon FS4000US combo to scan and process images in Photoshop 7x. I always scan at full resolution and save as an uncompressed Photoshop document. Thus, I can print 13 x 19 enlargements at 300 DPI or rez down for smaller prints or web display. For the rare larger print I use Genuine Fractals, a Photoshop plugin, to rez up the file. This nifty program increases the printing resolution and insures smooth, continuous tones without digital artifacts. However, it doesn't increase detail that's not already there. In other words, a true 50 MB image has more information than a 25 MB image enhanced to 50 MB with Genuine Fractals.
I leave the original chrome on a Cabin light box and use it as a guide for color adjustments. I often spend a great deal of time compressing the dynamic range of scans to fit within the display range of monitors and inkjet prints. This entails working with multiple image and adjustment layers and blending these layers by sight. Negatives are especially troublesome as they have a dynamic range that exceeds monitors, scanners and paper. For extremely contrasty images I scan the negative twice, once for shadows and again for highlights. I then selectively erase and blend the two scans in Photoshop. I apply noise and blur filters if necessary and save the file as a Photoshop document with all layers intact (so I can tweak later if needed).
Images from my digital cameras are always shot in RAW file format and are processed in Canon's Digital Photo Professional. I use RAW because it affords the most control and greatest quality. I may make minor adjustments (WB, exposure, contrast, Picture Style, etc.) before converting to TIFF. Compared to film scans, digital camera images need little processing other than minor adjustments (levels & sharpening). However the post-processing for print and web is basically the same.
Depending on the intended use of the image, e.g., inkjet prints or web, I adjust size and resolution for output: 300 DPI for printers and 72 DPI for web. Once I have the desired size and resolution, I apply the unsharp mask filter--often selectively with a mask or new layer--to taste (you don't want to sharpen skies or out of focus areas). Finally, I save the altered image under a new name to preserve the original file.
If I'm working on my website, I keep the site open in Fetch and DreamWeaver on my Mac. A DSL Internet connection and file sharing is used over Ethernet so I can quickly bounce files between my two computers and web server.
I store processed images on a dedicated "photo" hard drive and a copy on an external backup drive. I used to archive on Jaz disks but that became too expensive for Photoshop files and digital audio (two 1 GB Jaz disks cost $150, the same as a 120 GB harddrive). I like CDRs, but they're too slow for daily backups.
Never archive in compressed formats such as JPEG. Compression throws away information and compromises the quality of your image progressively each time you save the file. Use JPEGs only for web display and email.
Starting from Scratch? If you're starting from scratch and want to build a quality digital darkroom, there are so many options it's overwhelming. However, you can build an excellent quality starter outfit for around $1600. This setup will allow you to scan and process slides and negatives, and make excellent 8 x 10 prints (or larger if you upgrade to a higher printer model). Here's my suggestion for a quality budget system:
• Apple 24" iMac computer, $1800 (the 20" has a poor monitor)
• Adobe Photoshop Elements (excellent "junior" version of Photoshop), $99
• Epson Stylus Photo R800 inkjet printer, $375
• Nikon Cool Scan ED, $550
More Information There are many books and classes on Photoshop for graphic artists and web designers. However, few of these resources address the basic needs of photographers. The Luminous Landscape has many excellent tutorials for photographers at the on their website. Photo.net is also a good source of information about photography, cameras and scanning. Rob Sheppard's book is a wonderful primer for image tweaking, printing and presentation.
Sheppard, Rob. Epson Complete Guide to Digital Printing. New York: Lark Books, 2003. ISBN 1-57990-427-0
8/9/2001 • 7/11/2008
©Copyright 2001-2008 by Peter Kun Frary • All Rights Reserved .
• Photography Index • Home •
