Camera opinions..

I am in the market to buy a new camera and want some feedback. I know there are huge opinions on brands and which is best but thought I'd fish for opinions a bit..
I am either going to go with the Panasonic HVX200A or the Sony HDR FX1000. The Panasonic is far more expensive which is not helping my decision. Also, dumping another 2K into P2 cards ***** however they seem to get rave reviews.
I shoot mainly fast moving footage (watersports). I do and will shoot everything in HD.
I am leaning towards the Sony as it is about half the cost. I shoot now with a hard drive JVC. Question...will I go through DV tapes like crazy? Is the quality on the P2 cards far better than that of a DV tape?
Which would you go with and why? Or, do you have a suggestion for a different cam in the same price range... 3K-5K.

Just another opinion.....
Both Panasonic and Sony have marketing levels that can be debated all day long, while they both have their own strategies there are many people here with strong opinion and/or relationships.
When looking for a camera at this lower HD level I would look at the front end of a camera first, mainly the sensor size and true resolution of these sensors before anything else. Most new cameras are offering a CMOS sensor system that is better for low light situations but has a rolling shutter that some here will say is the devil. Both Panasonic and Sony are moving away from CCD sensors and embracing CMOS sensors for the range of camera you are interested in, mainly because they cost less to produce and they are much better with low light sensitivity. Panasonic has first embraced the 720 HD format and Sony has always embraced the 1080 HD format. IMO having the largest Progressive 1080 sensor system is what I would be considering first.
The next consideration is what compression codec and the bit rates that is offered for the camera you are considering. Marketing again will limit you to lower bit rates on the recording. Marketing has also offered connectivity levels that add to the cost of the camera.
HDMI is a cost effective digital HD port for consumer levels, while HD-SDI is a professional digital interface, both connections will unlock the limits of the compression levels offered by both of these manufactures and there are solutions to record way beyond what these cameras can record.
I suggest you look into a camera with HD-SDI or HDMI connections and start learning about alternative recording solutions like the Convergent Design Nano Flash HD-SDI/HDMI Compact Flash card recorder. If you choose a camera with either of these HD digital connections you can take full advantage of what the camera lens and sensor can offer. Recording to the Nanoflash will allow you to garner the highest HD quality possible from the two unit you have asked advice about.
http://www.convergent-design.com/
AJA (Ki Pro) is even joining in on this concept of alternative tapeless HD recording devices to take advantage of higher quality recordings from HD-SDI/HDMI sources.
Good Luck
Z1.

Similar Messages

I own a t2i and am will be going to Switzerland, is it worth it to get a full frame camera,opinions?

I am a novice photographer in training, I am planning a once in a life-time trip to switzerland and want to get the most out of the landscape/mountain shots that I can.
Any opinions on whether my t2i will suffice, or how to make the most of this camera, a certain lens mm etc. (ofcourse I do not want to buy a lens that is above the t2i's paygrade)
or
get a full-frame camera with a high caliber lens, L-wide angle stuff etc.
Thanks for your consideration.
Randal

If you have to ask the question, then the biggest thing you can do to improve your photography is to practice with what you have. You most certainly do not need to move to full frame to get great trip photos, especially if you’re talking about landscape photography. If you really feel the need to buy some stuff then I’d recommend a decent lens. But honestly, and not to be critical, but based off the jargon in your post you don’t know your way around a camera all that well. You can’t just buy a fancy lens and expect it to produce award winning photographs. At this stage in the game technique will do far more than technology.
Make sure you have a decent range covered (e.g. 18 mm to 250 mm) and just go have fun. Shoot in RAW so you can fix (some of) your mistakes after Practice as much as you can before hand and learn to use the semi-auto functions like Av. Make sure to not only take practice pictures, but review and edit them… you learn the most from your mistakes. Try to make the mistakes before the trip. As someone who bought his first dSLR before a year long backpacking trip around the world, I wish I had the time to follow this advice beforehand.

I need un-biased opinions regarding Divi Cam 525D

Hi Creative consumers!
I've been a loyal creative follower (if not yet proud owner) for quite some time. And I know this might sound exaggerated but I have been waiting for YEARS for the release of the 525 D in my country. When I learned that it's being sold this month I practically fainted (seriously)...However as great as the product sounds (and I've ordered one already) I'm still hoping for 525 D users to give me some ideas regarding the highs and lows of the product. It would really help me a lot -- if not on?deciding whether to buy it or not -- but at least so I'd know what to expect. Thanks a lot!!!

its got a good video, and high light sensitivity, i had no problems shooting during night time, concerts etc..
the digital camera side, is a bit ok, cant compare with a pure breed digicam. You need to fondle a lot with its settings to get a good focus, since its focus is fixed to a macro, a portrait and normal focus to infinity.
so in conclusion, the camera does more of a video capability than a digital camera.

Opinions please: camera quality

Hello,
We normally shoot with a Panasonic AG-HPX500P.
We have a few field folks who have still cameras with video capabilities. They've taken video with these cameras and I've imported the clips into FCP to compare. Visually, the footage doesn't have as saturated of colors from the two still cameras as the Panasonic camera has. The two still camera models are: Canon Powershot SX1301S and Nikon D90. Here's a rundown of the compared specs that are different between the clips:
                                        Panasonic                    Canon                    Nikon
                                        AG-HPX500P          Powershot SX1301S     D90
Data Rate:                             5.9 MB/sec                        3.1Mb per sec             2.3 MB/sec
Frames per second:             23.98                                   29.97                              24 fps
Pixel Aspect:                      HD (960x720)                         square                         square
Compressor:                     DVCPROHD 720p60               H.264                         Apple Open DML jpg
Frame size:                        960 x 720                               1280x720
Do you have any thoughts about mixing footage from the Panasonic and one of the two still cameras in a finished program? Is it data rate that factors into color saturation? What is your opinion on the quality of the video from these two still cameras, if you've seen some samples? If you had to choose between Canon and Nikon would you choose the Canon due to the Data Rate?
The bigger question folks here are asking is -- is the Panasonic replaceable by the Canon or Nikon (my initial thought is NO--though my back would be thankful for it!)
Thanks for your thoughts!

Thanks Andy & Jim,
Yes, the audio is horrid. Especially for shooting wildlife footage which is what we're doing. Thank you for the model suggestions, Andy, I'll look into those. The field folks are people who want to help contribute to our productions, but who are not film people (which is a whole other issue, I know!).
To be honest, I haven't looked into the video capabilities of SLRs because it's still a still camera at the end of the day. There's nothing, in my opinion, that can replace a true cinematic lens--one of my frustrations with the Canon XL1, XLH1 series video lenses. Even though the Panasonic is still quite weighty (I'm 5'3"!) I'd rather lug that thing around and know I was spending my time well and not wasting it. I had the privlidge of shooting with a Sony HD CAM camera about ten years ago in grad school, and it produced superior image quality (1080i). We certainly don't want to go backwards either technologically or in quality. (which in this case happen to be one in the same!)
This discussion helps me make the argument against going SLR, so thank you. (I work for a state agency) Actually, my intent is to argue for the Red camera next time we change formats
Jim--I also come from a film background so you're speaking my language!!! And I know about crappy balance, too, from shooting with an XL2 with a 500mm still lens on the front Very frustrating!
But--if we get some fantastic wildlife clip on the still camera I may insert a clip or two into a program. But I certainly won't be using the SLR as my primary acquisition tool.
Cheers!
Tracy

Opinions and advice on pocket camera video please

Just bought a Flip UltraHD pocket camera. For the money pictures are great when used natively. But having converted the 720/30p pictures to 576/50i (using mpeg streamclip) to include in a PAL DV sequence I'm a bit disappointed by the loss of quality and motion artifacts that the conversion causes.
Does anyone have any experience of the Samsung U10 pocket camera which does 1080/50p and would presumably be better than the Flip when cut into DV PAL sequence ... wouldn't it?

Entertainment: it's one of few rewards we receive for contributing here.
But having converted the 720/30p pictures to 576/50i (using mpeg streamclip) to include in a PAL DV < </div>
That's an extreme conversion, you're throwing away tons of material during the scale and then trying to create fields from frames so, yes, of course it will look terrible. I'd be looking for more precise conversion applications instead of buying another camera.
You might want to investigate user forums for those rigs. You will find many more FLip owners who use Final Cut's tools there than you will find FCP users who have Flips here.
But search the forum for the them camera model, see what shows up.
bogiesan

What's cheaper? I came here for the best opinions

I am currently in a business contract with three different phones, I am not the primary account holder. I wanted to buy the iPhone 5 (of course) on sept. 14, but i was unable to over phone or internet cause its a business account, So i went in the next day and ended up signing a new contract (because the primary accoutn holder is out of country) for a iphone 5 32g. I paid $150 down and $299 for the phone. so that puts me around $450. now would it be cheaper pay for the early termination fee and take the phone or should i cancle my contract and return the phone for no fee but still paid them $150 then upgrade my excisting contract when the primary account holder comes back next month.

If you are still within the first 30 days, most carriers require the device to be returned. They may also charge a restoking fee.
It's up to you to figure out which is better for you... we simply do not have enough information to say which is cheaper. What I can personally say, is the route you've gone so far is not very smart.

What is the optimum core configuration for a new Mac Pro to process and manipulate very large (80 megapixel) images using PhotoShop and Camera Raw?

Hello:
I will be using creative techniques to process and manipulate a large number (hundreds) of very large (80 megapixel) images captured using a medium format digital back (Phase One IQ180).
Final output will be digital fine art imagery printed using an Epson 11880 at large sizes (up to 60 inches x ?), retaining the highest possible quality and resolution. I will be using Adobe CC PhotoShop and Camera RAW as well as Capture One software. PhotoShop filters will be used extensively.
The Mac Pro needs to be optimized for the above purpose and be useful for at least five years. I plan to max out all the other options (RAM, graphics cards, storage). Performance is more important than cost.
The few discussions I have found that mention optimum core configurations seem to lean toward 6 or 8 (but likely are not taking into consideration my need for manipulating a large number of very large files), so I am looking to this foum for opinions.
Thank you,
Kent

See if this helps
http://macperformanceguide.com/index_topics.html#MacPro2013

IPhone 6 Plus front camera not working or with lines and static?

My iPhone 6 Plus front camera is having problems. Sometimes it doesn't work at all and the camera app freezes. Sometimes it works fine for a little while and sometimes it shows multi color static or lines.
I've tried:
Restoring from phone (without restoring backup)
Restoring from iTunes (without restoring backup)
Deleting ispw and re-downloading iOS 8.1.1 then restore
The phone is less than 2 months old. I noticed it acting weird a week or so after I bought it but thought it was just software. At first it wouldn't work when using the camera app but worked fine using facetime. Now it acts up regardless.
Any advice or opinions will be much appreciated.

Nore wrote:
I have always used the iPhone's LED flashing alert to notify me when I get a call or text message. While I was on iOS 8 Beta 2-4 it was working fine. I did a clean install of the complete iOS 8 release and ever since then, the flash alert doesn't work.
Sometimes it will work on incoming calls, but will not work on text messages. I've tried soft/hard rebooting, clean wipe and fresh installs, and pretty much anything in between. Now, today I got my 128GB Gold ATT iPhone 6 Plus, and it's the same thing. Updated to iOS 8.1, reset everything/deleted all contents and settings. Both fresh install, and iCloud backups and still no alerts on text messages, but now I get them on calls. I tried my girls ATT 128GB iPhone 6 and she has the same problem too. My old phone was a 64GB iPhone 5S and hers was a 32GB iPhone 5. Everything was good until the official release of iOS 8.
I've tried searching for related issues, and haven't found anything since 2011 with a quick Google search. Most links just tell you how to turn the flash alert on but no new issues. All of my devices are on iOS 8.1. I gave my father my 64GB 5S with a clean install and he still has the issue as well. So, that makes my iPhone 6 Plus, my girls iPhone 6 and my fathers iPhone 5S not flashing LED on messages and sometimes calls. There aren't any custom vibrations enabled on any if the devices. Has anyone else experienced this problem? Is it a known bug or am I just not doing something right here? i never had an issue before the iOS 8 release. Any help would be appreciated.
Are you a developer? IF so try asking in the developer forum.

I think my hard drive is failing but would appreciate other's opinions

I had a problem where my system was more frequently getting beach balls of death, freezing, etc. after an upgrade to Snow Leopard. It finally got to the point that it would no longer boot up.
I tried everything I could think of from disk utility to running single user and manually running fsck. Finally, I broke down and got a copy of Diskwarrior. DW was able to rebuilt the directory and I was able to get my data onto my external HD. By the way, DW was not able to replace the damaged directory with the rebuilt one because it indicated there was a disk malfunction (hardware problem not software).
After I took off my data, I used my Leopard install disk to erase the hard drive and then install. However, I did not use the zero out data function, just simple erase. I then reinstalled Leopard.
After the install was complete, it said it would restart, which it did. Unfortunately, once it restarted and went through the welcome screen, it asked to set up. At the point I was setting up my account picture, it just froze again with the beachball of death. I couldn't get it to unlock to did a reset/restart.
Once it came back, after a very long boot time, I ran disk utility and asked it to verify the disk. It then gave an error of invalid index key along with the volume macintosh hd needs to be repaired and Error:Filesystem verify or repair failed.
Oh one last thing, I did let the installation dvd does through its own verification before installation and it reported no problems.
So, my feeling is that it's not a good sign when a fresh clean installation has problems from the start. As a result, I think that my HD is starting to bite the dust and needs to be replaced.
Any other opinions out there? Has anyone had really bad problems with their system where an initial fresh install didn't solve things but it turns out HD was fine?
Don't really want to buy a new HD, but on the other hand don't want to install to a damaged HD and have to go through all this again in a few weeks.
Opinions??
Thanks in advance,
Dan

Checking the RAM is a great idea. I'll give that a try and see what happens.
I've downloaded a SMART utility but the problem with SMART is that most of the time is doesn't detect an actual pending drive failure until the drive is completely dead. Right now, SMART says all is well, but clearly something is wrong.
Update: I completely scrubbed the HD last night, installed Leopard, and installed updates. After the updates were installed, I went to close the finder window that automatically appears on the desktop after installation. Well, as you might guess, instead of closing the window, beachball of death! Only thing I could do was shutdown via power switch.
I'll test the RAM and see what that says. If RAM checks out, it's time to get a new HD. Really miss Newegg over here in these parts!

Camera Raw Policy of Writing Back into Input Files

This came up in another thread, and I think it deserves its own discussion. I'd hope that we can influence the Camera Raw team's future direction. I welcome your input and opinions.
Given: Under some conditions Camera Raw writes data back into (overwrites) its input files.
Assuming you use Camera Raw to open your out-of-camera original files as many of us do, Adobe seems to be all over the road on whether to keep its hands off them or overwrite them...
Camera Raw will not touch a proprietary raw file, such as a Canon .CR2 or Nikon .NEF. There's a whole process for remembering settings in a separate database or sidecar XMP files. So far so good.
If you open a JPEG, TIFF, or DNG through Camera Raw, data WILL automatically be written back into it to tell another run of Camera Raw in the future what settings you used - without the software ever having warned you it will do so.
Some functions EXPLICITLY rewrite input files. You can ask the software to write new thumbnails back into DNG files, for example. This is fine - the user has instructed the software to overwrite the file, and the user is in charge, after all.
Overwriting/rewriting an input file without being instructed to do so is NON-INTUITIVE BEHAVIOR for an application. No one would expect an input file to be overwritten.
We do see that it causes people confusion. I'm sure there are people right now reading this in disbelief. I recommend you go test it for yourself (on a copy of one of your original files).
The original file being overwritten is one of the reasons why I don't configure Photoshop to open my out-of-camera JPEGs through Camera Raw.
Adobe's [mis]handling of input files on the surface seems to be derived from the history of DNG - where no camera actually writes the DNG file directly but it has been generated as an intermediate format through the DNG Converter, and as such can be handled with less "care" than an original camera file.
It seems to me that Camera Raw should NEVER write back into an INPUT file it is opening without a) letting the user know or b) being directed to do so.
Adobe:
Please give those of us who don't want our input files overwritten an option for using the database/XMP sidecar instead in EVERY case.
Thanks.
-Noel

Noel wrote: >> If you open a JPEG, TIFF, or DNG through Camera Raw, data WILL automatically be written back into it to tell another run of Camera Raw in the future what settings you used - without the software ever having warned you it will do so.<<
It depends.
As far as I can tell:
When a JPG or TIF file is Locked,
Camera Raw > Done results in a Write Permission Error.
When a DNG file is Locked,
Camera Raw > Done - writes a separate xmp sidecar file.
The JPG / TIF handling seems to me inconsistent. With a locked file I'd prefer to have a sidecar xmp created as well. Some of my JPG / TIF files are originals for me.
Peter
Windows Vista, CS4 w/ACR 5.7

Camera Raw vs. Photo Ninja

I've been hearing about a new product called Photo Ninja by the same people who make Noise Ninja, and some of the reviews by respected online personalities have actually touted it as producing superior images to Photoshop's Camera Raw.
Not being one to take others' opinions at face value without testing and looking at results with my own eyes, I requested an evaluation license to see for myself.
I'll say up front that going into the testing I figured Camera Raw would kick this contender to the curb. It's been (and still is) my opinion that Camera Raw is the best raw converter available today bar none.
Upon first trying out the package, I immediately stumbled upon a number of usability issues that would make PhotoNinja a pain to use... Things like unexpectedly slow control responses (I have one of the faster PC workstations available), some not quite intuitive controls, a UI that doesn't seem to conform to any known or typical computer standard (though I'll be the first to admit I have limited exposure to OSX)... It's not surprising someone intimately familiar with Camera Raw might have some initial troubles with the UI of another package, but I stumbled through it.
Mostly I am interested in image quality. Results - that which matters most to me.
I looked at a number of well-exposed Canon EOS-40D images I have captured, and some not so well-exposed. I looked at images that were taken with wide angle zoom lenses and needed correction of various kinds of distortion. In general, if I did something with either converter that made an image better, I attempted to equal or surpass the feat with the other converter. When I couldn't get things any better I stopped and examined the results.
Before I end up writing an even bigger novel, here are my (brief) observations on image quality so far, followed by a few screen grabs showing comparisons. Perhaps these can generate discussion...
OVERALL, Photo Ninja (PN) does a decent job - better than I expected, actually - but the devil is in the details. Photoshop Camera Raw (ACR) just makes images that consistently look better. I will say that I got to better looking results much more quickly with ACR, but I'm more familiar with it, so that may not be an important observation.
PN can't generate upsampled output (images with more pixels than the number of photosites in the camera), while ACR can. That flavors the quality - in general it means that while I started out thinking PN might be making images with more detail, it turned out that the more I tweaked each converter the more detail I was ultimately able to bring out with ACR, while PN reached a limit primarily because it couldn't pack the output pixels any tighter.
ACR is generally capable of finer adjustments. For example, PN can only rotate images in 1/2 degree increments.
Though PN does a quite decent job of de-mosaicing - visibly better than ACR's prior PV2010 process - the color and naturalness of appearance is better to my eye from Camera Raw with PV2012. Tree branches against bright sky or white buildings just look better and more natural from Camera Raw. That said, there were several cases where it appeared some lines were rendered more cleanly by PN (see the dark green trellis example below).
ACR's automatic chromatic aberration (CA) correction facilities seem more accurate overall, while PN left more colored fringes in most cases. On the other hand, ACR in some cases left slightly more colored de-Bayering artifacts.
Both tools seem capable of recovering a LOT of information from nearly overexposed parts of images, though ACR gets the nod for making the transition into overexposure look more natural.
I don't know how much profiling / tweaking capability PN has, and I do know I've tweaked my ACR some, but colors just look cleaner and more healthy to me (with a few exceptions) from ACR.
Anyway, I've made the following screen grabs to illustrate some of the above, Photo Ninja conversions are on the left, Camera Raw conversions are on the right. Note that the zoom levels are different because I opened images at upsampled resolutions in ACR (as I normally do) while PN cannot do this.
My conclusion: Though Photo Ninja produces surprisingly good conversions, it's not really serious competition for professionals who want to get the most out of their raw image data.
-Noel

Well done, Noel !
Even though ACR won out in your tests, the makers of PN should be pleased with your report and your methodology. Thanks for sharing.

Recommend a 3rd party camera app?

Hi,
I was wondering what people's opinions were in reference to using a 3rd party app from the app store for the camera (both photos and vid)...where the app will let you lower the resolution for taking pics and shooting video so you are not forced to use the native setting in iPhone? Not sure why Apple refuses to add this feature and forces everyone to shoot in the highest setting which eats up storage space.
Anyways wanted to see what others used before I decided on which app to go with.
Thanks!

Active Directory should have no effect on your ability to connect to your mail server. Check this out anyway: http://www.thursby.com/products/admitmac.html

Web cam recommendations please

Hi All,
I'd like to get a web cam with microphone for myself (in a low-light house) but also for three others who own pcs. These pc users are elderly with varying degrees of computer savvy. Sigh. This is strictly non-professional. Keeping the grandparents up to date on grand kids development, that sort of thing.
Does anybody have (1) opinions about what I should get for my Mac and (2) what to get these pc users?
Thanks so much.

If you have a Mac with USB 2.0 Ports and running greater than 10.4.9 then any USb camera that is "Vista Certified" or says USB Video Class (UVC) will work without need for extra drivers on the Mac.
If you have only got USB 1.1 ports then get a USB camera that has Mac Drivers and the iUSBCam utility (the page has a link to a camera guide about drivers as well).
The PCs will somewhat depend if they are on Vista or not.
8:34 PM Wednesday; December 10, 2008

Workflow & camera choice

I'm considering purchasing the Panasonic AG-HMC40. However, the idea of shooting in a native FCP format (like the JVC GY-HM100) strikes me as a fantastic idea.
On the other hand it costs 50-75% more. (Cost is always an issue, no?) After you trick out the Panasonic with some of the things included with the JVC, though, the gap in price is smaller.
Have any opinions you'd like to share about the two? How would the conversion time and/or space requirements affect an Intel Mac Pro with plenty of space and RAM?
Lastly, if two cameras were identical in every respect but one shot in a native FCP format and the other didn't, might that functionally compensate for a, say, 50% higher cost?
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

With the JVC GY-HM100u, when you import files, you can no longer use the Log and Transfer process.
Correct. You use the faster process of copying it to your media drive, then simply dragging it into your project, or going FILE>IMPORT. Boom, the footage is there.
If you want to preview a file, you have to load it in FCP or open it in QuickTime.
What is easier that previewing in QT? That's FAR easier than needed P2CMS for P2, or the Sony XDCAM EX Transfer Tool for XDCAM EX... or needed to use FCP's Log and Transfer for AVCHD. Simply click on the file you want to see, and press the space bar. Instant preview. Up arrow or Down arrow for the next clip. Couldn't be easier.
If you want to rename it, you have to rename it on the hard drive. I
Or you can rename it in FCP, and use the RENAME option in the MODIFY menu. Media to match clip. I do that often. VERY easy.
I'm finding that the editing process now takes me longer, because there is no Log and Transfer
Longer? Simply drag and drop into the project....done. Darn fast.
Major drawback. Great camera, but more work in the prep process when using FCP.
You are doing something way wrong if you think that bringing in a QT file already in an editable format that FCP deals with right from the camera is slower than the log and transfer process.
Shane

Does iPhoto alter images when importing from camera ?(+ tip for slideshow)

I came across the following article:
http://www.andrewburke.orconhosting.net.nz/mac/builtin.htm#photo
The claim here is that during import iPhoto alters images in some way. The iPhoto experts, Terence OldToad, LarryHN and others, could you please comment, what's your opinions on this ?
Resize Images for iPhoto Slideshows
If you are running a slideshow in either Preview or iPhoto, you want the image being shown to be exactly sized to your screen. Images from almost all modern cameras are much larger in pixel dimensions than your Mac's display, so they will be interpolated down to fit. When they are resized on the fly through interpolation they never look as crisp or pristine.
When I import images from my Nikon to the Mac, I keep them outside of iPhoto and at their original size, as an archive from which I might eventually produce some prints. From there I choose the best examples that I want to display onscreen and copy those out of the archive for processing. Each one of those favorites that I've chosen is then tweaked in an image editor (I use Gimp Shop) and the final step before sharpening is to resize it down to match the dimensions of my display.
My iMac is 1440 by 900, so if an image is narrower than that ratio I scale it so the height is exactly 900; if it's wider I scale it so the width is exactly 1440. After these tweaked and resized images are finished I import only those into iPhoto. Then when I run a slideshow they are displayed exactly at their original size (not stretched or shrunk to fit the screen) and the difference is stunning.

What he says is +"you want the image being shown to be exactly sized to your screen. Images from almost all modern cameras are much larger in pixel dimensions than your Mac's display, so they will be interpolated down to fit. When they are resized on the fly through interpolation they never look as crisp or pristine."+
The title of the piece is +"Resize Images for iPhoto Slideshows".+ He is talking about you resizing photos before you import so they will match the screen size during the display of a slide show on the screen - not iPhoto changing anything during the import of the photo but during the display of it - This is a bit like the cropping during printing questions - if you want to control exactly have is being shown (or printed) rather than use a generalized scheme to make photos fit a non native size then you much do the changes yourself
I'm sure that he is correct but since I use iPhoto as a photo library manager which lets me show quick and easy slideshows, I have no problem - *my original, unaltered photos are there in iPhoto* and available for use as I see fit - the degree of modification that takes place in the display of a slideshow has never even been noticeable to me - but then I do not see iPhoto as a single purpose slide show viewer - in fact that is a very minor feature for me
LN
Message was edited by: LarryHN

Camera opinions..

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for