Jump to content

Duncan_Andison

Verified
  • Content Count

    1,049
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Duncan_Andison


  1. Another alternative (and one I use) is buy the alamy lightroom plugin that allows you to upload / download metadata. It's not made by Alamy but it is very handy (see link below)

     

    1 - I then upload all files to Alamy without any keywords and then add them there with the 2.4 manager system.

    2 - Once done and they are present in the Alamy search engine (available to buy) go to the plugin, select the files in lightroom that you have just keyworded at Alamy.

    3 - Under the library module, select "Export" and choose the Alamy Fetch Metadata. Make sure the settings state replace keywords IPTC data and select "Selected Files" only. If you select all it will update your entire collection.

    4 - Sit back while it updates all your files. This includes the following headers. Description, Keywords, Alamy Essential Keywords, Alamy Main Keywords, Link to Alamy File, Alamy Reference and licence type as well as some other key Alamy data.

     

    The reason I add the data at Alamy and not in lightroom is down to the issue you highlighted. When you keyword in LR in bungs them all in Comprehensive. If you download the metadata with this plugin it adds the specific Alamy fields for keywording etc but also takes the contents of the two fields (essential and Main etc) and adds them to the main keyword field.

     

    After this, the only thing I have to do is update the Headline field before upload images to my website with correctly synced keywording. I got the plugin here.

     

    You can trial the plugin for free but it will only update about 3 files at a time.

     

    Hope this helps

    • Upvote 1

  2.  

     

    I see a lot of images with (more) on Alamy. I have similars, and would like to stack them this way. Does it happen automatically at Alamy, or is there something I have to do?

    Use the same keyword(s) for all the images you want to have more underneath.

    Remember that the last image you submit will be the first to appear. Do not send your best image first.

     

    wim

     

    Also, I have discovered that images appear in the order in which they are keyworded. I noticed it because I left three for last and they were done the following day. They showed up together even though one of them had been separated by another image when I submitted them. So I don't know if it matters if you keyword all on the same day - probably they stay in the same order they have appeared in Manage Images. But if there is one you want to be on "top" perhaps keyword it on the next day. Hope I'm right. I just noticed that happening the last time I keyworded.

     

    Paulette

     

    I wonder if this would happen if you amended the keywords?!?! Could be useful


  3.  

    If you have an X100 original, are you thinking of trading it in for an X100S?

    No, I'm definitely not going to trade my X100 for the S version, I'm very happy with the original. I might consider buying an S if there were any real advantages, which I don't really think there are

     

    Duncan. Don't get me wrong, I think the XP1 is a very good camera. I enjoy using it, and importantly, it has produced quite a few pictures that have sold. To be fair, I think my gripe is more with the software manufacturers, not least Adobe. The RAW conversion software just hasn't made the grade so far in terms of demosaicing (I think that is the right term) The watercolour effect on out of focus foliage, for instance, is particularly irritating, I am surprised that QC haven't objected to it. This phenomenon also appears in other software, including Silkypix to an extent. If I am faced with a picture that is going to include foliage I tend to reach for my Sony NEX.

     

    The very smooth, plasticky look is another source of annoyance. I have recently found that this can be avoided to some extent by setting the ISO between 500 and 800. Great for lower light levels, but a bit of a handicap in bright, sunny conditions, not that we see a lot of that in the UK!

     

    Overall, the XP1 is a great camera, but I only use it for certain subjects and use the NEX 6 or 5N for situations where I know the XP1 is likely to struggle. A lot of people complain about focus speed, and whilst it isn't blazingly fast, I find it fast enough for what I do. The 35mm is pretty good focus speed wise and has exceptionally good IQ. The 60mm is adequate on focus in good light and again has good IQ. I had the 18mm for about a week, but found it to be of very poor quality in the IQ department.

     

    Focus was a bit unreliable, and hit and miss until I recently adjusted the focus box (in EVF mode) to the size just above the smallest, having tried both largest and smallest, the medium setting is giving me the most reliable and consistent result. It should be noted that my NEX's have never, ever, let me down on focus, they never fail to lock and lock accurately. As the XP1 was going on twice the price, I think one might reasonably expect the same.

     

    The XP1 has been a steep learning curve to get the best out of it, for me anyway, but it is coming right.

     

    All the best.

     

    Rich.

     

    I seem to have lost some of the plastic look and gained more detail by setting the in camera NR to -1 or -2. I noticed a couple of other people complaining about the same thing and that's what they advised to help it.

     

    Like yourself, I have set the focus area to be a lot smaller and that makes a difference to speed. I am still stunned that I can set the auto iso to 3200 and know that the images will be useable. The Nex 7 used to be more a less a right off after 800. 

     

    I think I may also start using LR5 Beta as my main software package, hopefully there're aren't to many bugs in it.

     

    Thanks again


  4. X100s is a cracking camera......in my mind a definite step up from the X100 in terms of quality...

     

    I use it a lot for weddings and film+tv still where its extreme quietness is a major advantage.

     

    It is my 'carry around' camera...always with me....i use it day in , day out

     

    km

     

    ps..... and LR5 Beta is much, much , better at raw conversions from the Fuji .RAF files  than LR4.4

     

    Cheers.... i will try some raws from the X Pro1. I downloaded LR5 Beta the other day but haven't had much of a chance to play with it.


  5. No experience with the X100S but interested to hear what problems you've had with the X Pro 1.

     

    I've had mine for the last week. I use it with LR 4.4 for both jpg and Raw. So far I've been very impressed with the quality and even the autofocus isn't that bad at all. Occasionally hunts but not to bad and it seems to be very accurate. Using the 35mm and 18-55 at the moment and both are very impressive lenses indeed.

    • Upvote 1

  6. I am not getting great focus with my Sony RX1 for some reason. Most of my images are tossable.Good light,steady hand...It's really hard to predict and very frustrating.

    In addition,shooting RAW or jpeg the colors are too green and just not very pretty especially in mixed light.Fuji x100/x100s and any DSLR does a better job here.

    L

     

    With regards to the colour, it may be worth searching the internet for an improved colour profile.... infact, check out here, this guy creates the best ones.

     

    Is the focusing a deal breaker? Are you able to return it if your not fully satisfied?

     

    Focusing with the Nex 7 was a bit like this at times. I always had to double check the image to make sure it was ok. The other day, I picked up a Fuji X Pro1 to try out and while the autofocus is a little slower (not much though) than the Nex 7, it is far more accurate. Very happy with it.... so much so all my Nex gear is up for sale and selling all but a couple of studio lenses for the 5dmkii. 

    • Upvote 1

  7. When the X10 came out it was put on the Unsuitable Camera list, and as the X20 has the same size/type of sensor it may well suffer the same fate.

    The sensor is the same size but it is different. The new one is a X-Trans CMOS II sensor that has the AA filter removed. The DPReview shows it as being a significant improvement over the x10. The only question for me would be the 12mp size. That gives it a 4000x3000 max resolution which doesn't leave much room for cropping or downsizing to tighten up quality if sightly off. It also means it falls well below the 5000px min required by some of the other agencies I submit to.

     

    The X-Trans sensor on the X Pro1 is nothing short of remarkable. In terms of quality it outperforms my 5dmkii, especially at higher ISO's and while the focusing maybe marginally slower than the Nex, it is a lot more accurate.

     

    I am on the look out for a small fixed lens camera that can partner the X Pro1 and was looking at the X20 but I think the RX100 will win out in the end.


  8. I think the reason people do this is to improve their Google rank. These links back to their site all give them points with Google.

     

    Alamy seem to think it's about getting attention, which is why they don't want us replying to their posts. It's Alamy's forum so follow their rules. I have to say it's a bit silly when all the well meaning long term contributers are forced to walk around with their Alamy collections tied to their backs and it turns any Tom, Dick or Harry can sign up and anonymously  post anything they want.

    Of course there's just a small chance they really are posting these links simply to wind us up in which case it seems to have worked. :)

    The links won't improve their ranking here (not now anyway). Alamy use "No Follow" in their links which prevents the passing of any link juice that will improve ranking.

     

    Before the updated forum, Alamy didn't use "No Follow".

     

    As Dustydingo said, ignore the posts then they will be pushed down the list as we reply to others posts.... after a short time they are at the bottom of the pile  :D


  9. As of this morning, Alamy does not have the NEX-6 on its preferred camera list. I'm wondering why? They list the RX-1, RX-100, NEX-3, 5 and 7. No NEX-6. I could be very happy using the RX-1 or the RX-100, but I'm also content to stay with the NEX-3, 6 and 7 I have. 

     

    Frankly, I'm scared to ask Alamy about this.  :mellow:

    I can't imagine why they would take the Nex 6 off, can't be described as anything other than acceptable. Someone must have missed it off the list or deleted it in error. It has a better sensor and all round image quality when compared to the 3 & 5 and the RX100 I would imagine.... and, it out performs the 7 at higher ISO's as well with better autofocusing!

    • Upvote 1

  10.  

    Call me weak but I pushed the BUY button before I read David's comments. Thephotos on 500px and Flickr swayed me.

    I recently had the Fuji x100s. Mine was apparently defective soon after using so I will try and compare.

     

    I was injured while leaving a photo shoot last week...I can't pick up my DSLR at all;too heavy and it hurts to use the mouse too.The lower palm of my hand, up my arm ,shoulder;my whole right side..ouch...

    Some idiot left a brick outside of the huge public place I was at. Could not see it from the glass door as the frame obstructed it.

    I went flying and fell...Next day spent the day getting everything x-rayed...Nothing broken luckily but still major pain;could have a sprain too.

     

    L

     

    What a bad deal, Linda. Please be careful to not overdo. I fell out of bed a couple of months ago (a first for me), and bruised my rib cage. It took a month to heal. 

     

    Thanks for the comments on my Central Park image, people. 

     

    Duncan, I can use the NEX-6 at ISO 1,600 and fix the noise in LR4. I could reduce it in CS5, too. 

     

     

    Cheers Ed.... I took a look at a Nex 6 the other day, nice finish to them and there didn't appear to be any colour cast using a Voigtlander 12mm lens (tried mine on a nex 6 at the shop). I'm very hesitant about the RX1. I would like the quality but I feel I would miss the tilt screen the most for low angle shots.

     

    I have about 8 weeks before I head off to Peru and if no 7n appears before hand I think I will pick up a Nex 6 Body as a second camera. I think I will end up with the 7n though rather than the RX1. I do like the 24mm and the new 18-200 is performing really well. These two lenses with the 12mm are the lenses I use the most so I will end up with the 18-200 on one body and one of the others on the second I think. And, I will have a fair bit of cash spare!


  11. Call me weak but I pushed the BUY button before I read David's comments. Thephotos on 500px and Flickr swayed me.

    I recently had the Fuji x100s. Mine was apparently defective soon after using so I will try and compare.

     

    I was injured while leaving a photo shoot last week...I can't pick up my DSLR at all;too heavy and it hurts to use the mouse too.The lower palm of my hand, up my arm ,shoulder;my whole right side..ouch...

    Some idiot left a brick outside of the huge public place I was at. Could not see it from the glass door as the frame obstructed it.

    I went flying and fell...Next day spent the day getting everything x-rayed...Nothing broken luckily but still major pain;could have a sprain too.

     

    L

     

    That sounds nasty...... hopefully the new RX1 will help ease the pain.... apart from the bank balance anyway  :D

     

    I'm very close to going for it as well, just looking for the best deal in the UK. 

     

    The screen is a type which reflects daylight well. It's not perfect, but it worked well for me in midwinter. I have not had a chance to use the camera in glaringly bright conditions but I have little trouble with other Sony screens like the RX100 and A99 which are similar or 'worse' in daylight. The EVF is excellent.

     

    As an additional point, although the accessory does not yet exist, the RX1 hot shoe has contacts to allow a GPS module to be added. I have Nikon's Coolpix A here at the moment (I really must send it back as the battery is dead and I already sent them the charger back - in error...) and this has a GPS-compatible socket in the side. I wish these camera all just had GPS built in. It has proved SO useful for Alamy. How else could I ever hope to know which small village in the Ounila valley of the Atlas mountains I was taking a shot near - and every other stop on a 4-hour drive?

     

    David

     

    Thanks David.... I would probably start off with the Camera on it's own then decide whether I want the EVF. I do like the one on the Nex 7.

     

    GPS is very useful, I use an app on my phone (android) called Geotag Photos Pro. It records locations every 15 seconds (you can change the timing) and email the GPX to lightroom. Lightroom then applies the co-ordinates to each photo. I leave the app running all day and it hardly uses any power from the phone! It's a good alternative!

     

    "I have not had a chance to use the camera in glaringly bright conditions"  In Scotland, David? Are you okay?   :D 

     

    I have the Sony Zeiss 24mm. It's twice the lens of any of my other NEX lenses are . . . and at only 4X the price. Besides a f/1.8 max f-stop and great sharpness, the view is a useful 36mm and it focuses to 6.5". 

     

    Click on the people on the far side of the pond to see 100% blowup of the 24 f/1.8 at work:  http://fineartamerica.com/featured/the-pond-ed-rooney.html

    Stunning shot Ed.... it is a fantastic lens, as you say, the best they currently have for the Nex. I've had some real nice shots with mine. Just missing the higher ISO performance. 

    • Upvote 1

  12. I have used the RX1 and Nex 7 and X100 (but not S which isn't officially here). I was using the RX1 at the same time as the Alpha 99, Nikon D600, Nikon D800 and Canon 6D. I can only say there is nothing else quite like it in terms of the lens and sensor combined. I was provided with both the optical and the EVF for the RX1. Interestingly enough, I found myself using the rear screen for composition nearly all the time despite having £1000 worth of finder aids. I had also recently bought an optical finder for my NEX-5n with 16mm; again, after a brief period of finding it a novelty, I have reverted to just using the rear screen.

     

    I do not have the 24mm Zeiss but I have seen results and it's not in the same league.

     

    The RX1 is quite amazing especially at ISO 6400 and f/2 for night/city scenes. I can't afford one though. I can't afford the A99 and D600 either and I'm afraid both those will probably be sold, my older cameras are perfectly adequate and the little RX100 is so good I now hardly even bother to use any other camera.

     

    David

    Thanks David, toying with the idea of selling the 24mm Zeiss and going for an RX1. Crop for longer FL's and stitch for wide angle views.

     

    How did you find the screen in bright light?

     

    My end goal is to have a high quality compact system Nex plus RX possibly, and to sell my Canon 5Dmkii, 100-400, 17-40, sigma 150mm macro and a couple of other lenses. That would more than enough to finance the new gear.

    • Upvote 1

  13. Anyone have the Sony RX1camera?

    I'm considering buying one. Also any Fuji x100s users use the Sony RX1? Comparison? Thoughts?

     

    I love the thought of a full frame small compact camera

     

    Linda

     

    Same here, would love to here from someone who has the RX1 and Nex 7 (with 24mm Zeiss) for a comparison! 

    • Upvote 1

  14. You get several things with the bigger older lens - much better 200mm performance with less softness and vignetting, and much better OSS. This is what makes it better for video of course, but it also means the OSS is more effective for stills. The image is not deformed as much during OSS shifts. It's designed to keep everything looking perfect during videos. Lower distortion too. I could never afford the big one.

     

    David

     

     

    Received a 18-200mm Sony lens.... unfortunately it was the new version.

     

    Sharpness wise, the 18-200 is very similar to the 50-210mm. I was about to take it back but thought I would give it a test today when heading over to the Lake District to see how it performed in the real world. This is what I found

     

    1. The likeliehood of obtaining the best sharpness with the 18-200 seems significantly better. The autofocus is better, faster and more accurate than the 50-210.

    2. With the manual focus ring being nearest the camera it meant using DMF was a lot easier. Cradle the lens with you left hand / fingers leaving your thumb to make minor adjustments. The manual focus ring for the 50-210 is on the outside and is awkward to adjust when half pressing the shutter button for DMF. I feel this is a big improvement / benefit, so easy now to make minor adjustments.

    3. The optical steady stabiliser seems a hell of a lot better on this lens, so much so I'm wondering whether my 50-210 is a bit of a dud. The 18-200 really steadies the image a lot and makes it very easy to use DMF when it zooms in. Holds it very steady even at 200mm. The 50-210 bounces around still, all be it a lot less than without the stabilisation but no where near to the same extent as the 18-200.

    4. Decent weight and size. When on a Nex 7 I can still fit the lens and camera into my map pocket of the jacket if it starts to rain. Normally it's attached to my backpack strap with the Capture Clip System by PeakDesign. This I also rate very highly, brilliant piece of kit.

     

    Even with challenging light, low contrast early on, it came up with plenty of keepers and when the light improved it was a pleasure to use.... nice and sharp. Softens slightly on the extreme edges but not horrendously so, very acceptable. 

     

    It looks like the 50-210 will be up for sale shortly!

     

    David.....thanks again for your help earlier with this, much appreciated!


  15. Does anybody own one or two of the newer, slick-looking, mod Sigmas for the NEX system. I'm considering the 19mm f/2.8, which sell here in NYC at $199. 

    Not one of the newer ones but I do have the original one. From what I understand, the optical design remains unchanged but they have improved autofocus as well as the looks of the lens. Looks a bit more like a sony lens and less plastic looking. Optically, the original 19mm is great, nice and sharp.

     

    The manual focus ring was a bit sticky so hopefully they have improved this when tweaking the case.


  16.  

     

     

     

    I've never had this happen before. The search was for "Water splash" and an image of a sandhill crane came up. Neither "water" nor "splash" was in the keywords. I don't think I have made an error but the search engine did. Has anyone else run into this?

     

    Paulette

    So do I understand right, someone viewed one of your images, which "water splash" was used and your own keywords do not have either of those words anywhere.

     

    Do people go day by day and look at every image search that someone does on ones own images?

     

    How did you find this error?

     

    I look at what people searched for and whether the images presented are correct - good way to weed out errors.  Can't say I do it every day, but try to do it as often as possible, doesn't take long.  I'll also try to see whether the images presented are the 'best' ones.

     

    I've also seen a few strange views that I can't explain.  Can't recall previously ever seeing an error in the search terms  I can usually find why an image has been portrayed when I wouldn't expect it to. 

     

    Essexps

    I do exactly the same. Each day check searches and make sure my keywording is relevant with no typos etc. 

     

    Also, you need to pay close attention to description and location as the search will take into account what you put into these two boxes. I have found a few images in the past that have shown up in a search without the keywords but the words searched for were either in the description or the location. Careful wording in both of these is required to avoid false positives!

    I think you will find that the Description is NOT searchable but the Location IS. This means that it is safe to put extra info in the Description field that you don't want searched. Sometimes I put the location in there if it is only slightly relevant to the image i.e. if a buyer might want to know where a still life or portrait was taken but I don't want it to come up in searches.

     

    Pearl

     

    Interesting, I think what you'll find here is duff info.... from me  :D  I meant to say "Caption" not "Description". Force of habit as I use it to provide a brief description.


  17.  

     

    When testing the 55-210mm, I also found that on the sample I tried, the right hand side was blurred at 150-210mm even at apertures like f/8 of f/11. I ended up with a Tamron 18-200mm LE and that is not as good at 55-100mm, or as fast at longer focal lengths, but it's generally even in its type of sharpness loss at wider apertures.

     

    If you want a really good lens there is one (OLD) choice and that is the original, 67mm filter thread, heavy 18-200mm with a far better OSS stabilisation system. This lens is still the sharpest and best wide to long tele zoom made for NEX (and better than most made for DSLRs too).

     

    David

     

    Cheers... would that be Sony's 18-200? Did you try it before taking up the Tamron version? Thanks

     

    The original OSS 18-200mm was launched with the first NEX-5. It costs abour £700 but used examples can be found for around £300-400. It is a much bigger lens, but in a completely different optical class. The new 62mm thread lightweight Sony model is actually just the Tamron (they even have the same firmware identity on the camera and use the same corrections in-camera), so I naturally have the cheaper alternative - the Tamron! But if you want a lens which exceeds the quality of either of these, the 'old' big lens is the only choice. It's the one they use on their much more expensive video rigs.

     

    David

     

    Thanks David.... The two 18-200's that I have found for sale are

     

    The original silver one that was designed for video (i believe) - Here

     

    And this newer version for stills and is black - Here

     

    I'm hoping it is the former..... as I have ordered one at Jessops at that price (£547). Not paid for yet so I can try it out in the store first!

     

    They heard rumours that the 7n maybe announced in May but may cost up to £2k..... seems a little high.... unless they have opted for a Foveon Sensor that has also been rumoured! Now that would be interesting.

     

    I've seen some Raw files for the Sigma DP2M and they were stunning, very sharp and almost 3d like..... but, I was put off by the battery life (20-40 shots when in good conditions)..... problematic up a mountain in cold conditions  :D


  18. When testing the 55-210mm, I also found that on the sample I tried, the right hand side was blurred at 150-210mm even at apertures like f/8 of f/11. I ended up with a Tamron 18-200mm LE and that is not as good at 55-100mm, or as fast at longer focal lengths, but it's generally even in its type of sharpness loss at wider apertures.

     

    If you want a really good lens there is one (OLD) choice and that is the original, 67mm filter thread, heavy 18-200mm with a far better OSS stabilisation system. This lens is still the sharpest and best wide to long tele zoom made for NEX (and better than most made for DSLRs too).

     

    David

     

    Cheers... would that be Sony's 18-200? Did you try it before taking up the Tamron version? Thanks


  19. Yes, good to see the topic reinvigorated.

     

    I believe that my copy of the 55-210 Sony zoom has a de-centred element, as I am finding it impossible to get uniform sharpness across the field of view at longer focal lengths. Currently using an old Pentax 75-150mm f4 manual focus zoom, which, in addition to providing better corner to corner sharpness, is producing higher pixel count JPGs than the Sony, Sending Sony zoom to have it looked at by official repairer - interested to know what they have to say. At the shorter focal lengths it is better than the kit zoom, maybe I expect too much of this relatively inexpensive lens!

     

    The Sigma 19mm is the only auto focus lens in my possession that I can trust to produce really sharp and contrasty images,  old manual focus primes out perform the kit 16-50 with ease.

     

    An additional drawback to using this non autofocus old glass is that they all suffer, to a greater or lesser extent, from CA with the digital sensor, but that's easily removed in LR.

     

    I look forward to the day when Sigma or a.n.other bring out a pair of decent E fit auto focus zooms to match the quality and range of the 24-105 f4 and 70-200 f4 that I use with my Canon.

     

    Despite these issues, I am still preferring the NEX 6 to 5DII for most of my photography, It's just so easy to carry around.

     

    I have the same dilema with the 55-210mm I know it can produce good shots but the autofocus on it seems  below par.

     

    I am currently looking at alternatives before heading off to Peru in July so if anyone can put forward some recommendations I would really appreciate it.

     

    For instance,

     

    1. legacy zoom and adapter

    2. New Alpha zoom with either the LA-EA2 oe EA1 adapter.

    3. Or emount 18-200 from Sony or Tamron

     

    Cheers

    • Upvote 1

  20.  

    I've never had this happen before. The search was for "Water splash" and an image of a sandhill crane came up. Neither "water" nor "splash" was in the keywords. I don't think I have made an error but the search engine did. Has anyone else run into this?

     

    Paulette

    So do I understand right, someone viewed one of your images, which "water splash" was used and your own keywords do not have either of those words anywhere.

     

    Do people go day by day and look at every image search that someone does on ones own images?

     

    How did you find this error?

    Yes I check each day.

     

    Click on each search term so you can see which images of yours were viewed.

    Click on the image are check the keywording, description and location to make sure it is correct.


  21.  

     

    I've never had this happen before. The search was for "Water splash" and an image of a sandhill crane came up. Neither "water" nor "splash" was in the keywords. I don't think I have made an error but the search engine did. Has anyone else run into this?

     

    Paulette

    So do I understand right, someone viewed one of your images, which "water splash" was used and your own keywords do not have either of those words anywhere.

     

    Do people go day by day and look at every image search that someone does on ones own images?

     

    How did you find this error?

     

    I look at what people searched for and whether the images presented are correct - good way to weed out errors.  Can't say I do it every day, but try to do it as often as possible, doesn't take long.  I'll also try to see whether the images presented are the 'best' ones.

     

    I've also seen a few strange views that I can't explain.  Can't recall previously ever seeing an error in the search terms  I can usually find why an image has been portrayed when I wouldn't expect it to. 

     

    Essexps

    I do exactly the same. Each day check searches and make sure my keywording is relevant with no typos etc. 

     

    Also, you need to pay close attention to description and location as the search will take into account what you put into these two boxes. I have found a few images in the past that have shown up in a search without the keywords but the words searched for were either in the description or the location. Careful wording in both of these is required to avoid false positives!

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.