Eric's photos parts 2&3
 

I added some photos of elephants crossing a river tributary and some assorted lion, bird and balloon photos to the original album so if you click on the url from the prior thread they are there. More to come slowly as I turn tiffs into jpgs.
Regards,
Eric

Thanks, Eric....more nice pics. Liked the lions, the bee eater (specific name?) and the marshall eagle too..

Cheers,
Hari

Hello Eric,
The elephant crossing pictures are wonderful,very nice moment you had there.
The flying eagle i would say is a Black-chested Snake Eagle and the bee eaters i think are little bee eaters.That shark is also impressive...

Paco.

For ease:

http://www.kodakgallery.com/Slidesho...wq3yd&Ux=1

Love those birds-in-flight photos.

Calo, thanks for the comments and reposting the url for "ease".
Regards,
Eric

Yes, wonderful photos, Eric. Thanks. A technical question if you, and other readers, don't mind. I, too, have stiil been shooting with EOS-3's. I've just been getting inexpensive scans to disk, and they work reasonably well for posting, but was wondering how you go about converting to digital format. Do you convert to JPEG or Tiff? Also, what computer, processor, software are you using? I may have asked you the question re. scanning once a long time ago. If so, sorry.

Also, are you planning the switch to all digital any time soon. I'm buying good glass for now for my film cameras, but am waiting for the follow-ons to the Canon bodies, 30D, 5D, 1DS MkII, that include dust control and sealing.

Back to your trip--there has been some discussion on the thread re. crowded conditions at times and places. We are spoiled with our trip to Zambia where we rarely saw other vehicles at any time (except occasionally in So. Luangwa, and even there, only occasionally). I know that in certain places like Ngorongoro, avoiding other people is impossible (some temporary respite apprarently by getting into the crater early), but can you recommend strategies, lodges outfitters whereby one might be able to see the migration without lots of other people about? Or fences. Or internet. Thanks,

Jim

Jim, I will give you my opinion which is based on my personal experience and by no means the only way to go. First off I also shot with the Eos 3 and A2e until I went digital. The conversion was pretty quick and I would not be too concerned about the transition. In 2001 both my son and I shot 100+ rolls of slide (me) and print (him) film each. This pattern repeated itself in 2002 with the addtion of my daughter shooting 70 rolls of print film. When we returned in 2004 my son and I had Canon 10D's and my daughter a digital rebel. In addition my son and I each took a back up film body with about 30 rolls of film. I shot 6 rolls and he about 10. In 2005 I took a 20D and Eos 3 and took only 4 rolls of slide film and he took none. This past trip was all digital all the time, no film only my 1D MarkII and 20D and his 5D and 20D.
Fortunately the glass we had worked on everything we upgraded to. The Eos 3 is very much like the 1D Mark II as far as controls so I don't think it would be too difficult to change if you decided to go that way. I now shoot in Raw format (I started in large jpg + Raw) and convert the photos on my Mac. Photos are usually stored as Tiff's. My understanding why one doesn't save in jpg format is that every view of the file has some effect on the picture. I don't know if it is a practical problem or has enough of an effect to adversely alter the photo. I use DPP to convert the Raw image but there are other Raw converters and as many photogs use one versus another for their own reasons. I then do my layers and masks and sharpening in photoshop and voila I have spent hours on what took 3 minutes to put film in an envelope and mail to Kodak.:))
I have no real good answer for you regarding privacy on the Mara except to impress upon your guide/ranger that you do not want to follow other vehicles and prefer more intimate experiences. Even in prime migration season we had some great unique sightings even if we didn't see everything.
Regards,
Eric

Jim,

My wife shoots only in RAW mode, converts to .tif for storage & quality printing, and low res .jpeg for web display and proof printing.

I store all my slide scans as .tif files (at 4000 dpi, the files can be as big as 60 mb or 150+ mb if they're medium format), resize to 300 or 360 dpi .tifs for printing, 72 dpi .jpegs for web display and email, and I also store low res .tifs in case I want to make any quick corrections or improvements in the future. Repeated altering and saving of a .tif file won't change file quality, but .jpegs are affected (however slightly). Most people probably don't notice the change.

John

Oops, so sorry John and Eric. Got my people crossed. So many great pictures by both of you. John (and my apologies Eric--I can go to another thread if you prefer), but pretty much the same questions for John. What are your reasons for sticking with film? I just found out my favorite local processor is no longer processing slides. Looks like I will have to go back to mail in envelopes. Any plans to switch? What scanner are you using? What do you think of the Nikon Coolscan?

Jim,

"What are your reasons for sticking with film? I just found out my favorite local processor is no longer processing slides....Any plans to switch? What scanner are you using? What do you think of the Nikon Coolscan?"

My reason is probably just that I'm old-fashioned ;). I originally decided to stay with film a few years ago because image quality with slides was just so far ahead of even the very best digital SLRs. But as we're all aware, digitals have advanced at a fantastic pace and the best ones are now producing brilliant quality. They have also made photography so much easier for people...and I guess I don't want it to be easy for me. I love the challenge of producing good quality images with relatively slow film (100 ISO), and for those images to be presentable with minimum post-processing.

So I have no plans to switch to digital. I do shoot some digital, but only to help my wife in her business...if we do a wedding or some other social event for example, I act as back-up cameraperson, using a long lens to get the candid stuff. I'm also her bag-carrier and chauffeur :D I see how much longer than me she spends in front of her computer, processing images, and that makes me even more determined not to go the same way. I already spend enough time scanning and processing for my website and for photo sales. I've no experience of the Nikon Coolscan, as the scanners I use are a fairly old Canoscan FS 2710 film scanner, and a newer flatbed Epson 4870 (for medium format slides, as the Canoscan handles only 35mm). My lab, probably the top pro lab in my city, still processes slides, and believes there will still be a market for slides for years to come. I recently had them do me a 100 cm by 63 cm enlargement on stretched canvas from one of my slide scans, and more recently I sent a 250 mb high res scan of another slide to a customer abroad who wanted a similar size canvas enlargement for his home. It's very satisfying to have safari slides good enough for that kind of reproduction.

John
www.afrigalah.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps just a bit of clarification on jpg files. If you VIEW a jpg and then simply close it, no change is made to the file. If you view it and then SAVE it, then changes probably are made to the file. How much change is made to the jpg file on saving depends on the program used. If serious about keeping the original jpg quality then do not "work" on those files. Make a copy of the file to work on. Keep the original and never work on it, only a copy of it.
regards - tom

Tom is right. But, being an ultra cautious critter, I always keep and duplicate .tif files to work on, and never use .jpegs for that purpose. For me, image quality is too important to risk overlooking an accident (like forgetting to duplicate a .jpeg for 'working', only too easy to do at the end of long hours in front of the computer when your eyes are hanging from stalks...one of the prices we pay for the digital age). But it does depend on your ultimate aim, so, yes, making 'working' copies of .jpegs will do.

John