eleskin
Well-known
I find the lens hood a little too big for my style of shooting on the 18-55mm Fujinon with my X Pro 1. I know it is there to prevent flare, but this is a modern lens with rave reviews. Anyone ditch the hood in favor of a more compact profile package for street shooting? I am thinking about it. Any compact hood alternatives?
Buzz40
Recovering Leicaholic
I leave mine on. It is a bit large and goofy looking, but it's never gotten in the way for me. I look at it as cheap, but homely, insurance. Flare prevention and bump protection for lens and filters.
cidereye
Film Freak
Just gets in the way too much and so difficult to attach in reverse to store in my camera bag too.
Just ordered a simple screw-in 58mm vented metal lens hood on eBay. Can't take any more!
back alley
IMAGES
i switched hoods on the 14 (same hood for the zoom)...i do not like tulip hoods.
the hood that i want to change even more is on the 60mm...that one could do double duty on an oil pipeline!
the hood that i want to change even more is on the 60mm...that one could do double duty on an oil pipeline!
GaryLH
Veteran
cidereye
Film Freak
Aye, what ever possessed Fuji to make it so darn huge? Not owning a 60mm I can only guess that it is waaaaay over the top of what is actually needed for a hood.
Buzz40
Recovering Leicaholic
The hood for the 60? Even Billy was complaining about it in the Fuji Guys' XF lens lineup video! ;-)
stompyq
Well-known
I don't use mine. Haven't seen any adverse effects
back alley
IMAGES
the 60 hood is almost as long as the lens itself...making a somewhat compact lens into a long one!
Jdi
Established
What I'm looking at is a 58-62 step up ring and one of the quite short Heliopan or Nikon hoods. Have not done anything about it though.
I don't use the tulip. Only lens with a filter (protection) but I'd like to get rid of the filter and still have some ding protection.
I don't use the tulip. Only lens with a filter (protection) but I'd like to get rid of the filter and still have some ding protection.
willie_901
Veteran
I use keywords for multiple purposes.
To address your task of keeping track what you have published:
Set up a Collection Group named Published
Make a new keyword named Published
Make Collection Group your Target Collection.
Add images to that Collection.
When images are added go to the Collection, select all and click on Published in the Keyword List.
You could add the keywords before or immediately after you publish them. You could skip the keyword step if you are diligent about moving published photos into the Collection.
I also use keywords for editing (not processing). I have Proofs and Candidates. Proofs are edited to select Candidates. The Candidates are used to assemble portfolios, slideshow galleries or submissions.
I use flags the way you use stars. Proofs or better are flagged, everything else is unflagged, and technically flawed (unusable) images get the X and are eventually deleted. Because disk space is inexpensive, I treat the Library Folders as virtual contact sheets. I never delete in-flagged images.
I also back up the original raws to an external drive automatically upon import to LR. So everything on the card is saved in it's native format. That drive is backed up nightly to a second external drive. Upon exit the LR Catalog is backed up to the first external drive. This means I have four copies of the Catalog (internal HD, Time Machine HD, external HD 1 and external HD 2).
I use stars several differant ways... which is not a good idea. I use stars to rank flagged photos. This is done for all flagged photos which always have at least one virtual copy. When I'm editing (not processing) I use stars to separately rank the photos for the project, portfolio or series I'm working on. Any thing that gets published (in the LR context) has four or more stars. Five stars means I that image is finished and requires no more attention. I use colors to indicate different versions of final or close to final images. My method is inconsistent.
I always make new virtual copies for each new editing session.
To address your task of keeping track what you have published:
Set up a Collection Group named Published
Make a new keyword named Published
Make Collection Group your Target Collection.
Add images to that Collection.
When images are added go to the Collection, select all and click on Published in the Keyword List.
You could add the keywords before or immediately after you publish them. You could skip the keyword step if you are diligent about moving published photos into the Collection.
I also use keywords for editing (not processing). I have Proofs and Candidates. Proofs are edited to select Candidates. The Candidates are used to assemble portfolios, slideshow galleries or submissions.
I use flags the way you use stars. Proofs or better are flagged, everything else is unflagged, and technically flawed (unusable) images get the X and are eventually deleted. Because disk space is inexpensive, I treat the Library Folders as virtual contact sheets. I never delete in-flagged images.
I also back up the original raws to an external drive automatically upon import to LR. So everything on the card is saved in it's native format. That drive is backed up nightly to a second external drive. Upon exit the LR Catalog is backed up to the first external drive. This means I have four copies of the Catalog (internal HD, Time Machine HD, external HD 1 and external HD 2).
I use stars several differant ways... which is not a good idea. I use stars to rank flagged photos. This is done for all flagged photos which always have at least one virtual copy. When I'm editing (not processing) I use stars to separately rank the photos for the project, portfolio or series I'm working on. Any thing that gets published (in the LR context) has four or more stars. Five stars means I that image is finished and requires no more attention. I use colors to indicate different versions of final or close to final images. My method is inconsistent.
I always make new virtual copies for each new editing session.