Відео

Thanks Robert...looking forward to seeing you soon!

5dsr is good but get a sturdy tripod, I use 5dsr for art, architecture and landscape. Excellent camera.

Thanks so much Diarmuid!

Cheers Simon!

Thank you very much Simon. We're delighted you got this great offer on super paper. The feedback is very much appreciated. Enjoy printing!

Thank you so much....delighted you're enjoying our channel!

Same here! That's why I kept going back! :-)

@@OSMPhotography Worth it, you got some lovely images ;-) I will never forget climbing to the Acropolis lol

Thank you! Yup, me neither! :-)

Thank you Cashino! The answer depends on whether speed or resolution is more important. For performance, the mark 4 is amazing! And the resolution is plenty for most uses. The 5dsr has amazing resolution, but really is only needed for making large prints that people will see up close, and you need the latest lenses to get the benefit. For 90% of situations, I would say get the mark 4. Hope this helps. :-)

@@OSMPhotography Cheers, that helps Mark4 will be the sensible option for me when ready. Greatly appreciated :-)

No problem. You’re welcome. This might all change when the EOSR5 comes out, but then again, I think that will mean the 5d4 will be available at lower prices on the used market.

@@OSMPhotography Yup funds are limited so it will be the 5D4 unless my lotto numbers come up lol. I have had a 1hr test with the EOSR and 5D4. I was more excited by the EOSR than 5D4 but same time I realised the 5D4 is a beast and a would be a solid investment. When I get older EOSR/5 :-), for now, i still have the strength to handle DSLRs ~

cashino The 5d4 is an amazing camera! You will enjoy it for sure!

Thank you! That’s really nice of you to say! Just to let you know, we do a lot of workshops and talks in The UK. In fact we will be over in the next club season, so if your club wanted, we could arrange a workshop. :-)

@@OSMPhotography That is good to know, are club is based in the South East of Kent so if you ever have a tour that way it would be good to know. I will request a friend add on Facebook if that is ok, Gary Stamp, my avatar is a collie dog.

TheGazzadj No problem. I’ve just accepted your request now. Thanks again and I will talk to you soon!

@@OSMPhotography Thank you and hopefully get over this pandemic very soon!

TheGazzadj Absolutely! Stay safe!

Thank you Kyle! No problem. I am actually putting up a video either tomorrow or Saturday all about monitor white point, so if you haven't subscribed, it might me a good idea so you get to see that video. Without seeing your room, it depends on the colour temperature of any ambient light in your room. If the light (if any) in your room is very yellow, then that can affect how you perceive the colours on your monitor. It might be worth having a calibrated profile at 5800K so you can see colours accurately on your screen while in that environment. However, that may even depend on how much the light colour temperature in your room affects your perception. A bigger monitor would mean you don't get affected by ambient light colour temperature so much. If there is no other light in your room (which I don't recommend, as you might perceive your images to be brighter than they are), then only worry about a daylight target white point to match viewing conditions explained below: The most important thing to consider with monitor white point is where the images will be viewed most often. If your prints will be viewed in daylight, or daylight balanced light, then calibrate to D65 (6500K), or somewhere between D60 and D65 (6000K - 6500k), but anything down to 5600 K is not a million miles off of Daylight. If your images are being vewed online, then definitely 6500k to match the majority of monitors out there in the WWW. If your prints will mainly be viewed in warm (eg, Tungsten type) light, the definitely use a warmer target of D50 (5000K) or below. Some brochure design houses use warmer, eg. 3500K, as they are creating Artwork that will be viewed in homes late in the evening under indoor incandescent lighting. Contrary to a lot of misguided advice out there, there is no one value that works for every situation. The best way to see which is best for you is: 1. Set it to one value, (say D65), edit an image from scratch, and print it. Take to print to view it in the conditions you expect them to be mainly viewed in. 2. Set it to an alternative Value (Say 5800K), Edit a duplicate of the image from Scratch again, print it and view it in the target conditions again as above. Then you will see which one is giving you a more accurate result. For myself over the years I have found that having at least 2 profiles that I switch to (During the day, with window light in the room it's set to D65 , and in the evening, I use a warmer one), As time has gone on, and as indoor lights are more varied than they used to be, I find myself working mainly in the D65 one, and only switching occasionally to check images before exporting for a specific use like Web Galleries or brochure print etc. Images are more and more being viewed in Daylight conditions these days. Hope this all makes sense! It might be clearer in the video! :-)

@@OSMPhotography Thank you very much for the detailed explanation, I really appreciate it and will let it sink in. I get it with the viewing conditions being a big factor in it, but how about the color of the paper(warm, neutral, blue) when it comes to choosing to calibrate monitor between say 5000 and 6500? I understand a lot of the individual aspects of color calibration, icc profiles, papers, viewing conditions, but I think I struggle a bit knowing exactly how to tie them all together to make the right choices, ultimately so my prints look their best, and have a repeatable process. I look forward to your video on this for sure, as well as other ones, you have a lot of great knowledge to share and excited to learn more.

@@OSMPhotography oh, and I've very happily subscribed to your channel...

​@@kyledarrenhanson Thank you! And also for the kind words. On the question of paper tone - It's a good question, and of course it has an effect, but nowhere near as much as lighting conditions. The idea is to get the image to look as accurate as possible in the target viewing condition, and the perceived colour of the paper changes with the lighting conditions. Paper tone variations for the most part are not that obvious at all until you put them side by side.For the most part, they don't require a change to editing, and people forget that the paper profile takes the paper tone into account as well. The paper tone is most noticeable on the white areas, but again, really only if images are placed side by side on different paper types. The exceptions to this are papers that have got "Optical Brighteners" added. These phosphoresce under UV light to make them appear whiter than they are. This can cause the whites and highlights to shift dramatically under daylight. But this doesn't happen under other conditions where there is no UV. So, if you try to correct for this happening, by having a brighter image, it fixes the issue for a very specific lighting situation, but makes the print look too warm in eery other scenario. So again - We are back to the viewing conditions being the most important consideration. :-) Things to bear in mind - --Most monitors are only capable of reproducing their full colour gamut when set to their "native" white point. This is D65 in the vast majority of modern monitors. --The Human eye tends to correct for colours and light colour temperatures using daylight as a reference point. It doesn't tend to correct for how things look in daylight, it just sees them as they appear. So... An image edited for daylight looks perfect in Daylight, and will still look ok under other situations, as the eye/brain tries to shift the colours in our vision back to daylight so we can accurately process the colours in our minds. But.... An image edited to be viewed under warmer lighting conditions... Will look REALLY blue in daylight balanced lighting, because the eye does NOT correct from daylight back to tungsten. :-) And this is all going to happen regardless of paper tone. I hope this helps. :-)

ps - I saw a video recently where the advice was: "If you're editing for print, calibrate to D50, because that's the colour of paper". That is such poor advice. The colour of paper is the colour of the light in the room! :-)

Hi Matthew! Thanks for getting in touch. I have no colour cast issues. There are a number of things that can cause this to happen though. If I can see screenshot of the settings you're talking about, it will clarify things a bit for me. If you contact me via the contact form on my site: www.mosullivanphoto.com I will reply to you with my email address. Also - What version of MacOS are you using? I am aware that some driver versions have been causing these kinds of issues with the most recent MacOS versions. I would rather check your Workflow first before jumping to conclusions though. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Hi Mathew, did you solve your colour issue? I have a similar problem but my black and white prints are printing with a blue colour cast.

@@laynieree4536 No - Unfortunately. I've turned to using a pro lab....sadly. If you find a solution please let me know.....M

@@mathewmccarthy9848 Hi Mathew, I tried printing in LR using the Canon plugin and choosing the setting black and white instead of ICC profile. I'm not not how that worked but it did.

@@mathewmccarthy9848 I don't even own a print yet, so this is second hand and you may have to check this yourself but it seems that you have to download and install the canon drivers and in no case use apple air ( some kind of conflict ).

No Problem. It doesn't always necessarily cause problems though. Most of the time it's fine. It's only an issue where an image has already been sharpened before re-sampling, or where there are high contrast small details like lines etc, which can end up being made thicker because the algorithm has to fit it in proportionately larger, or eliminate it. For someone like me, who does practically everything in RAW, including output sharpening, it's wise to avoid re-sampling. :-)

The 5d4 has better dynamic range. You can look it up at Dxomark

So lucky 🍀