<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:pingback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/pingback/" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Todd Taylor's Blog - Photography</title>
    <link>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/</link>
    <description />
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Todd M. Taylor</copyright>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2009 19:57:59 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>newtelligence dasBlog 2.0.7226.0</generator>
    <managingEditor>toddtaylor@toddtaylor.com</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>toddtaylor@toddtaylor.com</webMaster>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/Trackback.aspx?guid=75104e5a-1bf5-40c2-a3f1-4a43c15bb611</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,75104e5a-1bf5-40c2-a3f1-4a43c15bb611.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Todd M. Taylor</dc:creator>
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,75104e5a-1bf5-40c2-a3f1-4a43c15bb611.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=75104e5a-1bf5-40c2-a3f1-4a43c15bb611</wfw:commentRss>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
Many of the photos I've taken in low light situations seems to have what looks like
red or green dots on them in random locations.  I thought these were "hot pixels"
resulting from the longer exposure required for a low light picture.   I
also thought this was a sign that my camera's sensor was becoming defective.
</p>
        <p>
After doing a little research, apparently these "hot pixels" are actually "stuck pixels"
as found on a <a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/olympusesystem/discuss/72157608674737360/">Flickr
discussion</a> regarding this topic:
</p>
        <blockquote style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir="ltr">
          <p>
            <em>Stay away from Pixel Mapping unless you have DEAD or STUCK pixels...<br /><br />
Pixel Mapping is NOT for hot pixels...<br /><br />
DEAD pixels are ones that no longer work, and would result in a black dot at the same
spot on ALL images.<br /><br />
STUCK pixels are ones that are stuck on and would result in a colored dot (usually
always the same color) in the same spot on ALL images.<br /><br />
Those are the ONLY pixel issues that Pixel Mapping will resolve.<br /><br />
I think I read that Olympus recommended that you DO NOT run pixel mapping to often
as it could result in good pixels being mapped as bad, and once a pixel is mapped
as bad it is turned off and can not be turned back on (at least not by the user).</em>
          </p>
        </blockquote>
        <p dir="ltr">
I addition to being able to remove "stuck pixels" through pixel mapping, a feature
I never used on my camera was the noise reduction.  A F.A.Q. section on the Olympus
web site explains how noise reduction works on the E-500 and how to turn it on:
</p>
        <p dir="ltr">
          <a name="40" href="http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_support_faqs.asp?id=1192#40">
            <span>How
does the EVOLT E-500 combat noise commonly found at high ISOs?</span>
          </a>
        </p>
        <p dir="ltr">
My online search seems to show that hot pixels and/or stuck pixels are just part of
the dSLR world and having a few spots on one's image isn't justification for throwing-out
one's camera.  Between using the camera's pixel mapping and noise reduction,
or through manual photo processing, the hot pixel issue is one that I have to learn
to live with but can fix.
</p>
        <p dir="ltr">
Another cool tip found on the <a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/olympusesystem/discuss/72157608674737360/">Flickr
discussion</a> group was how to get use data out of my camera, such as how my pictures
I've taken with it:
</p>
        <blockquote style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir="ltr">
          <p dir="ltr">
            <em>Hot pixels is normal on almost every SLR camera and can be removed quite easily.<br /><br />
I would be more concerned with shutter activations because that is a major mechanical
part in the camera that can go wrong.<br /><br />
Apparently, Olympus guarantees the E500 for 50,000 shots. I’ve taken 61,565 shots
and there is no sign of failure but I’m ready to accept a problem!<br /><br />
If you want to check the usage stats on a E500 follow this procedure…<br /><br />
1. turn the camera on<br />
2. open the memory card door<br />
3. press “play” and “OK” at the same time<br />
4. press the following buttons in the following order - "up" "down" "left" right" 
<br />
5. fully press the shutter release button<br />
6. press the “up” button<br />
7. press the “right” button – takes you to page 2<br /><br />
On page two you will see…<br /><br /><b>R: wwwwww – how many times the shutter has fired</b><br />
S: xxxxxx – how many times the flash has fired (includes hot shoe flash)<br />
M: yyyyyy – number of times mirror lockup has been activated<br />
U: zzzzzz – SSWF count - number of times sensor cleaner has been activated<br /><br />
My E500 says:<br /><br />
R: 061565<br />
S: 014403<br />
M: 000088<br />
U: 008833<br /><br />
If you shoot RAW then isolated pixels aka hot pixels is an easy situation to deal
with. Lightroom and Photoshop ACR will automatically remove them for you and other
RAW processors will give you an option to remove them.</em>
          </p>
        </blockquote>
      </body>
      <title>Hot Pixels on My Olympus E-500?</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,75104e5a-1bf5-40c2-a3f1-4a43c15bb611.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/2009/01/17/HotPixelsOnMyOlympusE500.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2009 19:57:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
Many of the photos I've taken in low light situations seems to have what looks like
red or green dots on them in random locations.&amp;nbsp; I thought these were "hot pixels"
resulting from the longer exposure required for a low light picture.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; I
also thought this was&amp;nbsp;a sign that my camera's sensor was becoming defective.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
After doing a little research, apparently these "hot pixels" are actually "stuck pixels"
as found on a &lt;a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/olympusesystem/discuss/72157608674737360/"&gt;Flickr
discussion&lt;/a&gt; regarding this topic:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr&gt; 
&lt;p&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Stay away from Pixel Mapping unless you have DEAD or STUCK pixels...&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Pixel Mapping is NOT for hot pixels...&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
DEAD pixels are ones that no longer work, and would result in a black dot at the same
spot on ALL images.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
STUCK pixels are ones that are stuck on and would result in a colored dot (usually
always the same color) in the same spot on ALL images.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Those are the ONLY pixel issues that Pixel Mapping will resolve.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I think I read that Olympus recommended that you DO NOT run pixel mapping to often
as it could result in good pixels being mapped as bad, and once a pixel is mapped
as bad it is turned off and can not be turned back on (at least not by the user).&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt; 
&lt;p dir=ltr&gt;
I addition to being able to remove "stuck pixels" through pixel mapping, a feature
I never used on my camera was the noise reduction.&amp;nbsp; A F.A.Q. section on the Olympus
web site explains how noise reduction works on the E-500 and how to turn it on:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p dir=ltr&gt;
&lt;a name=40 href="http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/cpg_support_faqs.asp?id=1192#40"&gt;&lt;span&gt;How
does the EVOLT E-500 combat noise commonly found at high ISOs?&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p dir=ltr&gt;
My online search seems to show that hot pixels and/or stuck pixels are just part of
the dSLR world and having a few spots on one's image isn't justification for throwing-out
one's camera.&amp;nbsp; Between using the camera's pixel mapping and noise reduction,
or through manual photo processing, the hot pixel issue is one that I have to learn
to live with but can fix.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p dir=ltr&gt;
Another cool tip found on the &lt;a href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/olympusesystem/discuss/72157608674737360/"&gt;Flickr
discussion&lt;/a&gt; group was how to get use data out of my camera, such as how my pictures
I've taken with it:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;blockquote style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr&gt; 
&lt;p dir=ltr&gt;
&lt;em&gt;Hot pixels is normal on almost every SLR camera and can be removed quite easily.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
I would be more concerned with shutter activations because that is a major mechanical
part in the camera that can go wrong.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Apparently, Olympus guarantees the E500 for 50,000 shots. I’ve taken 61,565 shots
and there is no sign of failure but I’m ready to accept a problem!&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
If you want to check the usage stats on a E500 follow this procedure…&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
1. turn the camera on&lt;br&gt;
2. open the memory card door&lt;br&gt;
3. press “play” and “OK” at the same time&lt;br&gt;
4. press the following buttons in the following order - "up" "down" "left" right" 
&lt;br&gt;
5. fully press the shutter release button&lt;br&gt;
6. press the “up” button&lt;br&gt;
7. press the “right” button – takes you to page 2&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
On page two you will see…&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
&lt;b&gt;R: wwwwww – how many times the shutter has fired&lt;/b&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
S: xxxxxx – how many times the flash has fired (includes hot shoe flash)&lt;br&gt;
M: yyyyyy – number of times mirror lockup has been activated&lt;br&gt;
U: zzzzzz – SSWF count - number of times sensor cleaner has been activated&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
My E500 says:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
R: 061565&lt;br&gt;
S: 014403&lt;br&gt;
M: 000088&lt;br&gt;
U: 008833&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
If you shoot RAW then isolated pixels aka hot pixels is an easy situation to deal
with. Lightroom and Photoshop ACR will automatically remove them for you and other
RAW processors will give you an option to remove them.&lt;/em&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
      <comments>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,75104e5a-1bf5-40c2-a3f1-4a43c15bb611.aspx</comments>
      <category>Photography</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/Trackback.aspx?guid=198606d0-ee81-496b-808d-350f8de6f831</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,198606d0-ee81-496b-808d-350f8de6f831.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Todd M. Taylor</dc:creator>
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,198606d0-ee81-496b-808d-350f8de6f831.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=198606d0-ee81-496b-808d-350f8de6f831</wfw:commentRss>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <p>
Although I like my Olympus E-500 for taking photos in daylight, I've been very
frustrated with it when taking photos in low light situations.   Since it's
winter here in Wisconsin, I find myself almost always in low light situations these
days and I started leaving my camera at home because I knew that I wouldn't be able
to get good shots with the built-in flash.
</p>
        <p>
As with most cameras, the built-in flash usually resulted in a lot of "red eye", unnatural
shadows, and over-exposed subjects with dark backgrounds.   If I turned
the flash off, I just ended-up with a blurry mess (even at high ISO
settings) since I rarely wanted to shoot subjects that were not moving.   
</p>
        <p>
One thing I really don't like about the E-500 is that is strobes the built-in flash
in order to get a focus lock.   Not only is this very distracting, especially
if the subject of your photo is a person or an animal, but it doesn't seem to work
very well since the camera doesn't get a focus lock very quickly.
</p>
        <p>
After attending a wedding a few weeks back where the photographer was taking one great
shot after another in low light, I asked the photographer what his 'secret' was. 
He said that he was just using a 'fast' lens along with the external flash and had
his camera set on auto focus.  Obviously, there there wasn't anything magic about
what this photographer was doing to get good shots, but he did have a good external
flash that I did not have.   So, thanks to a decent sale on Amazon.com,
I purchased the Olympus FL-50 external flash.
</p>
        <p align="center">
          <img title="OLYMPUS-FL50" height="225" alt="OLYMPUS-FL50" src="http://blog.toddtaylor.com/content/binary/OLYMPUS-FL50.jpg" width="300" align="center" border="0" />
        </p>
        <p>
Although Olympus offered cheaper models than the FL-50, I decided to get their flagship
model because it is the brightest flash offered.  As someone stated on the
DPReview.com forums, "You can always tone-down a bright flash to make it dimmer, but
you can't make a dim flash brighter."
</p>
        <p>
This is the first external flash I've ever owned, so I wasn't expecting to be able
to take decent photos for quite a while until I learned how to use it.  
However, I was pretty pleasantly surprised with how quickly I was able to start taking
very nice indoor shots while just leaving the flash in it's auto mode.
</p>
        <p>
Because the FL-50 blocks the built-in flash on the E-500 from popping-up, the flash
uses it's own red light to assist the camera with focusing in low light situations
rather than strobing the built-in flash.  To me, this is a HUGE reason for buying
this flash.   No more annoying disco-tech strobing and the camera does get
a focus lock much more quickly with the IR light.
</p>
        <p>
The other feature I really like about the FL-50 is it's pivoting head.  
It can be pivoted vertically and horizontally so you can make that the light is bouncing
off the correct object regardless of if the camera is vertical or horizontal.
</p>
        <p>
The only thing I don't like about have a flash on the camera is that the camera feels
very awkward now because it's so top-heavy.  If I'm not holding onto the camera
and just have it hanging around my neck by the strap, the heavy and tall flash
has a tendency to cause the whole camera to fall over.   I suspect this
would be an issue with any flash, but is still a bit annoying.
</p>
        <p>
So far, I'm very happy with my purchase.  I've got a lot to learn about how to
use an external flash, but even in the few times I've used it so far, I've greatly
increased the number of successful photos taken as compared to when I was just
using the built-in flash.
</p>
      </body>
      <title>Impressions of Olympus FL-50 Flash</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,198606d0-ee81-496b-808d-350f8de6f831.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/2007/12/27/ImpressionsOfOlympusFL50Flash.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Dec 2007 00:49:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;
Although&amp;nbsp;I like my Olympus E-500 for taking photos in daylight, I've been very
frustrated with it when taking photos in low light situations.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Since it's
winter here in Wisconsin, I find myself almost always in&amp;nbsp;low light situations&amp;nbsp;these
days and I started leaving my camera at home because I knew that I wouldn't be able
to get good shots with the built-in&amp;nbsp;flash.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
As with most cameras, the built-in flash usually resulted in a lot of "red eye", unnatural
shadows, and over-exposed subjects with dark backgrounds.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; If I turned
the flash off, I just ended-up with&amp;nbsp;a blurry mess&amp;nbsp;(even&amp;nbsp;at high ISO
settings)&amp;nbsp;since I rarely wanted to shoot subjects that were not moving.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
One thing I really don't like about the E-500 is that is strobes the built-in flash
in order to get a focus lock.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; Not only is this very distracting, especially
if the subject of your photo is a person or an animal, but it doesn't seem to work
very well since the camera doesn't get a focus lock very quickly.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
After attending a wedding a few weeks back where the photographer was taking one great
shot after another in low light, I asked the photographer what his 'secret' was.&amp;nbsp;
He said that he was just using a 'fast' lens along with the external flash and had
his camera set on auto focus.&amp;nbsp; Obviously, there there wasn't anything magic about
what this photographer was doing to get good shots, but he did have a good external
flash that I did not have.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; So, thanks to a decent sale on Amazon.com,
I purchased the Olympus FL-50 external flash.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p align=center&gt;
&lt;img title=OLYMPUS-FL50 height=225 alt=OLYMPUS-FL50 src="http://blog.toddtaylor.com/content/binary/OLYMPUS-FL50.jpg" width=300 align=center border=0&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Although Olympus offered cheaper models than the FL-50, I decided to get their flagship
model because it is the brightest flash&amp;nbsp;offered.&amp;nbsp; As someone stated on the
DPReview.com forums, "You can always tone-down a bright flash to make it dimmer, but
you can't make a dim flash brighter."
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
This is the first external flash I've ever owned, so I wasn't expecting to be able
to take decent photos for quite a while until I learned how to use it.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;
However, I was pretty pleasantly surprised with how quickly I was able to start taking
very nice indoor shots while just leaving the flash in it's auto mode.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
Because the FL-50 blocks the built-in flash on the E-500 from popping-up, the flash
uses it's own red light to assist the camera with focusing in low light situations
rather than strobing the built-in flash.&amp;nbsp; To me, this is a HUGE reason for buying
this flash.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; No more annoying disco-tech strobing and the camera does get
a focus lock much more quickly with the IR light.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The other feature I really like about the FL-50 is it's pivoting head.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;
It can be pivoted vertically and horizontally so you can make that the light is bouncing
off the correct object regardless of if the camera is vertical or horizontal.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
The only thing I don't like about have a flash on the camera is that the camera feels
very awkward now because it's so top-heavy.&amp;nbsp; If I'm not holding onto the camera
and just have it hanging around my neck by the strap,&amp;nbsp;the heavy and tall flash
has a tendency to cause the whole camera to fall over.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; I suspect this
would be an issue with any flash, but is still a bit annoying.
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;
So far, I'm very happy with my purchase.&amp;nbsp; I've got a lot to learn about how to
use an external flash, but even in the few times I've used it so far, I've greatly
increased the number of&amp;nbsp;successful photos taken as compared to when I was just
using the built-in flash.
&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <comments>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,198606d0-ee81-496b-808d-350f8de6f831.aspx</comments>
      <category>Photography</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/Trackback.aspx?guid=a3288698-8ce1-4288-91a6-36f79107aff1</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,a3288698-8ce1-4288-91a6-36f79107aff1.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator />
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,a3288698-8ce1-4288-91a6-36f79107aff1.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=a3288698-8ce1-4288-91a6-36f79107aff1</wfw:commentRss>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <div class="Section1">
          <p class="MsoNormal">
            <span style="font-family:&quot;Arial \(W1\)&quot;">I’ve been having problems with a SanDisk
Ultra II compact flash card and thought I lost a handful of images that I took over
the weekend.  Thanks to some help from the <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/">DPReview</a> forums,
I was pointed to the <a href="http://www.artplus.hr/adapps/eng/dpr.htm">ArtPlus Digital
Photo Recovery</a> application.  It’s a nifty little free application that
can recover photos from a corrupt memory card and did a pretty good job for me, even
after I had reformatted my compact flash card!</span>
          </p>
        </div>
      </body>
      <title>Recovering Corrupt Images</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,a3288698-8ce1-4288-91a6-36f79107aff1.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/2006/05/24/RecoveringCorruptImages.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 May 2006 04:14:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>

&lt;div class=Section1&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal&gt;
&lt;span style='font-family:"Arial \(W1\)"'&gt;I&amp;#8217;ve been having problems with a SanDisk
Ultra II compact flash card and thought I lost a handful of images that I took over
the weekend. &amp;nbsp;Thanks to some help from the &lt;a href="http://www.dpreview.com/"&gt;DPReview&lt;/a&gt; forums,
I was pointed to the &lt;a href="http://www.artplus.hr/adapps/eng/dpr.htm"&gt;ArtPlus Digital
Photo Recovery&lt;/a&gt; application. &amp;nbsp;It&amp;#8217;s a nifty little free application that
can recover photos from a corrupt memory card and did a pretty good job for me, even
after I had reformatted my compact flash card!&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;

</description>
      <comments>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,a3288698-8ce1-4288-91a6-36f79107aff1.aspx</comments>
      <category>Photography</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/Trackback.aspx?guid=1dfb959f-a20f-4729-bfec-9064630fc6b4</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,1dfb959f-a20f-4729-bfec-9064630fc6b4.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator />
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,1dfb959f-a20f-4729-bfec-9064630fc6b4.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=1dfb959f-a20f-4729-bfec-9064630fc6b4</wfw:commentRss>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <div class="Section1">
          <p class="MsoNormal">
Thanks to a new Photoshop add-in released by Adobe, Photoshop now supports the Olympus
Evolt E-500 RAW file format… lucky me!
</p>
          <p class="MsoNormal">
            <a href="http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=3267">Click here
to download the Adobe Camera RAW 3.3 add-in</a>
          </p>
        </div>
      </body>
      <title>Adobe Camera Raw 3.3 Supports Olympus E-500 RAW</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,1dfb959f-a20f-4729-bfec-9064630fc6b4.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/2006/01/30/AdobeCameraRaw33SupportsOlympusE500RAW.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:01:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>

&lt;div class=Section1&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal&gt;
Thanks to a new Photoshop add-in released by Adobe, Photoshop now supports the Olympus
Evolt E-500 RAW file format&amp;#8230; lucky me!
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal&gt;
&lt;a href="http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=3267"&gt;Click here
to download the Adobe Camera RAW 3.3 add-in&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;

</description>
      <comments>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,1dfb959f-a20f-4729-bfec-9064630fc6b4.aspx</comments>
      <category>Photography</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/Trackback.aspx?guid=eeecc7d4-7869-41a7-8a74-d915ffead574</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,eeecc7d4-7869-41a7-8a74-d915ffead574.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator>Todd M. Taylor</dc:creator>
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,eeecc7d4-7869-41a7-8a74-d915ffead574.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=eeecc7d4-7869-41a7-8a74-d915ffead574</wfw:commentRss>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <div class="Section1">
          <p class="MsoNormal">
            <span style="COLOR: black">I finally made the ‘leap’ into the digital SLR world.  I
sold my old friend, the Nikon Coolpix 5700, and bought one of these:</span>
          </p>
          <p class="MsoNormal" align="center">
            <span style="COLOR: black">
              <img height="203" src="http://blog.toddtaylor.com/content/binary/image001123.png" width="220" />
            </span>
          </p>
          <p class="MsoNormal">
            <span style="COLOR: black">I was actually dead-set on buying a Canon Digital Rebel
XT until the guy at the camera store introduced me to the <a href="http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg section/product.asp?product=1192">Olympus
Evolt E-500</a>. Is this a better camera than the Digital Rebel XT? Probably not,
but it seems to offer a lot more ‘bang for the buck’ than either the Digital Rebel
or the Nikon D50, especially considering it got it with two lenses for nearly the
same prices as the other brand’s single lens kits.</span>
          </p>
          <p class="MsoNormal">
            <span style="COLOR: black">One thing is for sure: It’s going to be a while before
you start seeing any worth-while pictures from me… I feel totally lost with this new
camera!  Having no twist-n-flip LCD and live preview is something I already miss,
but having ISO settings up to ISO1600 will be nice.</span>
          </p>
          <p class="MsoNormal">
            <span style="COLOR: black">Stayed-tuned for some nice photos… I hope!</span>
          </p>
        </div>
      </body>
      <title>Out With the Old, In With the New (Olympus Evolt E-500!)</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,eeecc7d4-7869-41a7-8a74-d915ffead574.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/2006/01/01/OutWithTheOldInWithTheNewOlympusEvoltE500.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jan 2006 22:41:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>&lt;div class=Section1&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal&gt;
&lt;span style="COLOR: black"&gt;I finally made the ‘leap’ into the digital SLR world. &amp;nbsp;I
sold my old friend, the Nikon Coolpix 5700, and bought one of these:&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal align=center&gt;
&lt;span style="COLOR: black"&gt;&lt;img height=203 src="http://blog.toddtaylor.com/content/binary/image001123.png" width=220&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal&gt;
&lt;span style="COLOR: black"&gt;I was actually dead-set on buying a Canon Digital Rebel
XT until the guy at the camera store introduced me to the &lt;a href="http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg section/product.asp?product=1192"&gt;Olympus
Evolt E-500&lt;/a&gt;. Is this a better camera than the Digital Rebel XT? Probably not,
but it seems to offer a lot more ‘bang for the buck’ than either the Digital Rebel
or the Nikon D50, especially considering it got it with two lenses for nearly the
same prices as the other brand’s single lens kits.&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal&gt;
&lt;span style="COLOR: black"&gt;One thing is for sure: It’s going to be a while before
you start seeing any worth-while pictures from me… I feel totally lost with this new
camera! &amp;nbsp;Having no twist-n-flip LCD and live preview is something I already miss,
but having ISO settings up to ISO1600 will be nice.&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal&gt;
&lt;span style="COLOR: black"&gt;Stayed-tuned for some nice photos… I hope!&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;</description>
      <comments>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,eeecc7d4-7869-41a7-8a74-d915ffead574.aspx</comments>
      <category>Photography</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <trackback:ping>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/Trackback.aspx?guid=d5434bc2-7383-4d8f-9710-79f88182b0d4</trackback:ping>
      <pingback:server>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/pingback.aspx</pingback:server>
      <pingback:target>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,d5434bc2-7383-4d8f-9710-79f88182b0d4.aspx</pingback:target>
      <dc:creator />
      <wfw:comment>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,d5434bc2-7383-4d8f-9710-79f88182b0d4.aspx</wfw:comment>
      <wfw:commentRss>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/SyndicationService.asmx/GetEntryCommentsRss?guid=d5434bc2-7383-4d8f-9710-79f88182b0d4</wfw:commentRss>
      <body xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
        <div class="Section1">
          <p class="MsoNormal">
Converting a color photo to black and white is pretty easy, but going the other way
is not… until now!  Recolored.com has a free beta download that allows
just about anyone to colorize their black and white photos:
</p>
          <p class="MsoNormal">
            <a href="http://www.recolored.com/">http://www.recolored.com/</a>
          </p>
          <p class="MsoNormal">
            <a href="http://www.recolored.com/shots/ss02 826.png">
              <span style="color:windowtext;text-decoration:none">
                <img border="0" width="320" height="258" src="http://blog.toddtaylor.com/content/binary/image00112.png" />
              </span>
            </a>
          </p>
        </div>
      </body>
      <title>Colorize Black and White Photos</title>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.toddtaylor.com/PermaLink,guid,d5434bc2-7383-4d8f-9710-79f88182b0d4.aspx</guid>
      <link>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/2005/12/14/ColorizeBlackAndWhitePhotos.aspx</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:45:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <description>

&lt;div class=Section1&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal&gt;
Converting a color photo to black and white is pretty easy, but going the other way
is not&amp;#8230; until now!&amp;nbsp; Recolored.com has a free beta download that allows
just about anyone to colorize their black and white photos:
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal&gt;
&lt;a href="http://www.recolored.com/"&gt;http://www.recolored.com/&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p class=MsoNormal&gt;
&lt;a href="http://www.recolored.com/shots/ss02 826.png"&gt;&lt;span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'&gt;&lt;img border=0 width=320 height=258 src="http://blog.toddtaylor.com/content/binary/image00112.png"&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;

</description>
      <comments>http://blog.toddtaylor.com/CommentView,guid,d5434bc2-7383-4d8f-9710-79f88182b0d4.aspx</comments>
      <category>Photography</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>