And it never hurts to have a beautiful model.
Reading mode:
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
New D30 Fashion pics
- Thread starter RolandSC
- Start date
RolandSC
Well-known member
Hi Bob, thanks
I use different methods for greyscale conversion depending on the image. For these pics I converted from color to bw by using the channel mixer . You need to play with the settings, they will be different for each image. I leave the files in RGB mode for b/w printing with the 2200. The originals are printed in a neutral b/w. For the web I used the Color balance setting set to +15 red and -15 yellow. The same here; you need to play with the settings depending on the image.
I often convert the images using duotones as well. There are so many ways of doing it and it depends a lot on what your output will be. Most of the time you will need to adjust the brightness and contrast of the image as well. I do this using curves drawing an S curve.
Another good way I use often is to convert the image to LAB color and deleting the a and b channels or by leaving the image in rgb deleting the blue and red channels. But as I said it depends on the image.
Hope this helps
Roland
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
I use different methods for greyscale conversion depending on the image. For these pics I converted from color to bw by using the channel mixer . You need to play with the settings, they will be different for each image. I leave the files in RGB mode for b/w printing with the 2200. The originals are printed in a neutral b/w. For the web I used the Color balance setting set to +15 red and -15 yellow. The same here; you need to play with the settings depending on the image.
I often convert the images using duotones as well. There are so many ways of doing it and it depends a lot on what your output will be. Most of the time you will need to adjust the brightness and contrast of the image as well. I do this using curves drawing an S curve.
Another good way I use often is to convert the image to LAB color and deleting the a and b channels or by leaving the image in rgb deleting the blue and red channels. But as I said it depends on the image.
Hope this helps
Roland
--Great shots on all your work.
I just have a question for you. What conversion method(s) are you
using to get Black and White/Sepia Images?
thanks in advance
Bob
This is a very simple setup. I took the pictures in a quite small
bedroom with a 500 watt Photoflex starlite in a small softbox
placed high above the subject and a spotlight at eye-level.
For this I used a simple 120watt halogen spot light bulb you can
find everywhere.
The key to get the right colors ( the b/w pics are actually very
nice in color too) is to get the exposure right. This is impossible
with a built in meter ( on any SLR) which tries to render whites
and blacks as medium grey. You have to use an ambient incident
meter like the Minolta Autometer and manual exposure. I used AWB
since there was some natural light in the room mixing with the
hotlights and the tungsten setting came out too yellow. Most of the
shots were taken between f/2.8 and f/4.3 at 125. You have to
re-measure everytime the subject moves but it's worth it.
The colors are dead on. No tweaking in Photoshop needed.
Unfortunately on the web you don't get to see the actual quality of
the images because of the extreme compression. I have printed the
originals at 13 x 19 on my Epson 2200 and they are gorgeous. Very
sharp with a nice bokeh. The Canon 85mm L lens helps a lot. The
model is a friend of mine ( she is only 16). That helps too.
Roland
--Beautiful shots!
This is the kind of lighting I would like to achieve in my own
shots. i don't have studio lights yet, but working on it. What kind
of lighting setup do you use and are you happy with the brand you
have? I just bought a d60 and am having major issues with the
autofocus, so I don't even know how good this camera can be yet.
your shots are all very sharp and free of chromatic abberations. I
hope I can get the same results out of my camera eventually. I also
would like to know what lenses you are using to get such clear
images. also, would you mind describing the lighting setup for your
latest shots. they really are wonderfull.
thanks for sharing,
Roger Kea
Here's a link to a shot I took with my old Uzi2100
http://www.pbase.com/roger_kea/cheapo_lighting
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
Bob Y.
Well-known member
Hi Roland,
I know what you mean about each photo has a different look and feel so I can't always use the same channel settings.
Thanks for the tips, I try them out on my next set of photos.
Bob
I know what you mean about each photo has a different look and feel so I can't always use the same channel settings.
Thanks for the tips, I try them out on my next set of photos.
Bob
I use different methods for greyscale conversion depending on the
image. For these pics I converted from color to bw by using the
channel mixer . You need to play with the settings, they will be
different for each image. I leave the files in RGB mode for b/w
printing with the 2200. The originals are printed in a neutral b/w.
For the web I used the Color balance setting set to +15 red and -15
yellow. The same here; you need to play with the settings depending
on the image.
I often convert the images using duotones as well. There are so
many ways of doing it and it depends a lot on what your output will
be. Most of the time you will need to adjust the brightness and
contrast of the image as well. I do this using curves drawing an S
curve.
Another good way I use often is to convert the image to LAB color
and deleting the a and b channels or by leaving the image in rgb
deleting the blue and red channels. But as I said it depends on the
image.
Hope this helps
Roland
--Great shots on all your work.
I just have a question for you. What conversion method(s) are you
using to get Black and White/Sepia Images?
thanks in advance
Bob
This is a very simple setup. I took the pictures in a quite small
bedroom with a 500 watt Photoflex starlite in a small softbox
placed high above the subject and a spotlight at eye-level.
For this I used a simple 120watt halogen spot light bulb you can
find everywhere.
The key to get the right colors ( the b/w pics are actually very
nice in color too) is to get the exposure right. This is impossible
with a built in meter ( on any SLR) which tries to render whites
and blacks as medium grey. You have to use an ambient incident
meter like the Minolta Autometer and manual exposure. I used AWB
since there was some natural light in the room mixing with the
hotlights and the tungsten setting came out too yellow. Most of the
shots were taken between f/2.8 and f/4.3 at 125. You have to
re-measure everytime the subject moves but it's worth it.
The colors are dead on. No tweaking in Photoshop needed.
Unfortunately on the web you don't get to see the actual quality of
the images because of the extreme compression. I have printed the
originals at 13 x 19 on my Epson 2200 and they are gorgeous. Very
sharp with a nice bokeh. The Canon 85mm L lens helps a lot. The
model is a friend of mine ( she is only 16). That helps too.
Roland
--Beautiful shots!
This is the kind of lighting I would like to achieve in my own
shots. i don't have studio lights yet, but working on it. What kind
of lighting setup do you use and are you happy with the brand you
have? I just bought a d60 and am having major issues with the
autofocus, so I don't even know how good this camera can be yet.
your shots are all very sharp and free of chromatic abberations. I
hope I can get the same results out of my camera eventually. I also
would like to know what lenses you are using to get such clear
images. also, would you mind describing the lighting setup for your
latest shots. they really are wonderfull.
thanks for sharing,
Roger Kea
Here's a link to a shot I took with my old Uzi2100
http://www.pbase.com/roger_kea/cheapo_lighting
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
3526 reminds me of Kim Novak's glamourous beauty in Alfred Hitchcock's "Vertigo". Nice use of rollovers on your site.
I think the D30 is still respectable. Check out some of my new
fashion pics shot yesterday.
http://rolandscarpa.com/wylly2_mainpage.html
--
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
RolandSC
Well-known member
I agree totally WH Yi! This is exactly what we wanted to replicate.
The fourth picture in the row reminds me of Audrey Hepburn. In other pics she reminds me of Grace Kelly. We wanted to create a Hollywood Movie Theme. I think we came quite close.
I'm particularly proud of the make-up and hair. I did it myself for the first time. It's really hard, a profession apart.
There is another series of pictures of Wylly on my site; this is how she looks without make-up or very little. She is very fotogenic, actually a little chubby, not really thin and very very young.
Great skin. This makes it easy.
Roland
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
The fourth picture in the row reminds me of Audrey Hepburn. In other pics she reminds me of Grace Kelly. We wanted to create a Hollywood Movie Theme. I think we came quite close.
I'm particularly proud of the make-up and hair. I did it myself for the first time. It's really hard, a profession apart.
There is another series of pictures of Wylly on my site; this is how she looks without make-up or very little. She is very fotogenic, actually a little chubby, not really thin and very very young.
Great skin. This makes it easy.
Roland
--I think the D30 is still respectable. Check out some of my new
fashion pics shot yesterday.
http://rolandscarpa.com/wylly2_mainpage.html
--
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
Thanks again for the respite from the usual "hey just spent enough to feed Ethiopia on my 1st camera - here's a shot of my toenail - why is it out of focus and smelly??" posts.
3606 feels a bit like a comtemporary beauty such as Cindy Crawford emulating the poses of Golden/Silver Age Hollywood. Wylly's beauty mark shines here.
3542 could easily be used in a fashion magazine ad; the soft flat light makes her head look a bit like a Brancusi sculpture, which is in keeping with the Art Deco glamour of the time.
3550 is a more casual shot, which sets up a nice contrast to the adjacent shot, 3597, where her great smile lights up her eyes, mouth, & cheeks and her jawline is sleeker and more vibrant.
I'm reminded of Joan Crawford in 3517 - first, the rich crushed velvet dress with its' luxurious fur shoulder wrap, then the langorous lines of her pose, and her gaze up into the lens. Powerful undulating diagonal composition.
The luminous skintones are great in 3617, with the fur on the left providing a nice contrast of tone and texture - this shot also recalls the young Kim Novak.
Very accomplished make up job - enhances the vibrancy of her skin and beautifully defines her eyes and mouth without calling attention to the artifice. I like the other series of Wylly (is this some currently hip variation of "Willie" "Wilhemina"?) - wholesome sporty teenager looks, doesn't appear too zaftig (but the Hollywood Glamour period favoured luscious roundness in young ladies). If she's not too short for runway, she should be beautiful enough to sign with an agency such as Ford or Click.
Shoot & be well,
WH
3606 feels a bit like a comtemporary beauty such as Cindy Crawford emulating the poses of Golden/Silver Age Hollywood. Wylly's beauty mark shines here.
3542 could easily be used in a fashion magazine ad; the soft flat light makes her head look a bit like a Brancusi sculpture, which is in keeping with the Art Deco glamour of the time.
3550 is a more casual shot, which sets up a nice contrast to the adjacent shot, 3597, where her great smile lights up her eyes, mouth, & cheeks and her jawline is sleeker and more vibrant.
I'm reminded of Joan Crawford in 3517 - first, the rich crushed velvet dress with its' luxurious fur shoulder wrap, then the langorous lines of her pose, and her gaze up into the lens. Powerful undulating diagonal composition.
The luminous skintones are great in 3617, with the fur on the left providing a nice contrast of tone and texture - this shot also recalls the young Kim Novak.
Very accomplished make up job - enhances the vibrancy of her skin and beautifully defines her eyes and mouth without calling attention to the artifice. I like the other series of Wylly (is this some currently hip variation of "Willie" "Wilhemina"?) - wholesome sporty teenager looks, doesn't appear too zaftig (but the Hollywood Glamour period favoured luscious roundness in young ladies). If she's not too short for runway, she should be beautiful enough to sign with an agency such as Ford or Click.
Shoot & be well,
WH
The fourth picture in the row reminds me of Audrey Hepburn. In
other pics she reminds me of Grace Kelly. We wanted to create a
Hollywood Movie Theme. I think we came quite close.
I'm particularly proud of the make-up and hair. I did it myself for
the first time. It's really hard, a profession apart.
There is another series of pictures of Wylly on my site; this is
how she looks without make-up or very little. She is very
fotogenic, actually a little chubby, not really thin and very very
young.
Great skin. This makes it easy.
Roland
--I think the D30 is still respectable. Check out some of my new
fashion pics shot yesterday.
http://rolandscarpa.com/wylly2_mainpage.html
--
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
RolandSC
Well-known member
Hi everyone
I have added some new photos of Wylly, shot the same day in a more 'modern day' setting.
http://www.rolandscarpa.com/wylly3_mainpage.html
I'm quite happy with these pictures because it took only 5 minutes to take them at the end of the day and with only one small softbox the colors and exposure came out great.
Let me know what you think
Roland
I have added some new photos of Wylly, shot the same day in a more 'modern day' setting.
http://www.rolandscarpa.com/wylly3_mainpage.html
I'm quite happy with these pictures because it took only 5 minutes to take them at the end of the day and with only one small softbox the colors and exposure came out great.
Let me know what you think
Roland
Jeff Singer94142
Forum Enthusiast
Unbelievable. Those shots are amazing. You just went on to the top of my "respect" list around here... anything you say goes ;-)
You're website continues where these amazing photos leave off.
Well done!
Jeff
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
You're website continues where these amazing photos leave off.
Well done!
Jeff
--I think the D30 is still respectable. Check out some of my new
fashion pics shot yesterday.
http://rolandscarpa.com/wylly2_mainpage.html
--
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
RolandSC
Well-known member
Hi WH YI
I like your post, you did a great analysis of the photos, I'm impressed. I like when people have imagination and have feelings about things they see.
Thanks WH
Roland
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
I like your post, you did a great analysis of the photos, I'm impressed. I like when people have imagination and have feelings about things they see.
Thanks WH
Roland
--3606 feels a bit like a comtemporary beauty such as Cindy Crawford
emulating the poses of Golden/Silver Age Hollywood. Wylly's beauty
mark shines here.
3542 could easily be used in a fashion magazine ad; the soft flat
light makes her head look a bit like a Brancusi sculpture, which is
in keeping with the Art Deco glamour of the time.
3550 is a more casual shot, which sets up a nice contrast to the
adjacent shot, 3597, where her great smile lights up her eyes,
mouth, & cheeks and her jawline is sleeker and more vibrant.
I'm reminded of Joan Crawford in 3517 - first, the rich crushed
velvet dress with its' luxurious fur shoulder wrap, then the
langorous lines of her pose, and her gaze up into the lens.
Powerful undulating diagonal composition.
The luminous skintones are great in 3617, with the fur on the left
providing a nice contrast of tone and texture - this shot also
recalls the young Kim Novak.
Very accomplished make up job - enhances the vibrancy of her skin
and beautifully defines her eyes and mouth without calling
attention to the artifice. I like the other series of Wylly (is
this some currently hip variation of "Willie" "Wilhemina"?) -
wholesome sporty teenager looks, doesn't appear too zaftig (but the
Hollywood Glamour period favoured luscious roundness in young
ladies). If she's not too short for runway, she should be beautiful
enough to sign with an agency such as Ford or Click.
Shoot & be well,
WH
The fourth picture in the row reminds me of Audrey Hepburn. In
other pics she reminds me of Grace Kelly. We wanted to create a
Hollywood Movie Theme. I think we came quite close.
I'm particularly proud of the make-up and hair. I did it myself for
the first time. It's really hard, a profession apart.
There is another series of pictures of Wylly on my site; this is
how she looks without make-up or very little. She is very
fotogenic, actually a little chubby, not really thin and very very
young.
Great skin. This makes it easy.
Roland
--I think the D30 is still respectable. Check out some of my new
fashion pics shot yesterday.
http://rolandscarpa.com/wylly2_mainpage.html
--
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
Jeff Singer94142
Forum Enthusiast
because of what you said about the external light meeter, I'm placing my order on monday. i was on the fence as to weather I needed/wanted one, but now I know... altough, I'll be going with the Sekonic L-358.
Thanks again.
Jeff
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
Thanks again.
Jeff
--You're website continues where these amazing photos leave off.
Well done!
Jeff
--I think the D30 is still respectable. Check out some of my new
fashion pics shot yesterday.
http://rolandscarpa.com/wylly2_mainpage.html
--
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
RolandSC
Well-known member
Hi jsinger
You're right; it is absolutely indispensable to use a light meter. Any brand will do. Even the best metering system in a SLR is only a reflective meter. It can never be as accurate as an incident light meter due to the very nature of reflective metering. I'm always amazed to see so many people on this forum spending an awful lot of money on camera equipment and they don't even understand the importance of correct light metering. If you ever tried to shoot against a white or black background you see what I mean. The in -camera system will always try to render it medium grey, thus over or under exposing the picture. Even with multizone metering systems the results are not accurate. A $3000 camera should come with a light meter in the box.
You will be amazed how your photos will improve. ( by the way, I like the pictures on your site; you have a nice style)
Roland
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
You're right; it is absolutely indispensable to use a light meter. Any brand will do. Even the best metering system in a SLR is only a reflective meter. It can never be as accurate as an incident light meter due to the very nature of reflective metering. I'm always amazed to see so many people on this forum spending an awful lot of money on camera equipment and they don't even understand the importance of correct light metering. If you ever tried to shoot against a white or black background you see what I mean. The in -camera system will always try to render it medium grey, thus over or under exposing the picture. Even with multizone metering systems the results are not accurate. A $3000 camera should come with a light meter in the box.
You will be amazed how your photos will improve. ( by the way, I like the pictures on your site; you have a nice style)
Roland
--Thanks again.
Jeff
--You're website continues where these amazing photos leave off.
Well done!
Jeff
--I think the D30 is still respectable. Check out some of my new
fashion pics shot yesterday.
http://rolandscarpa.com/wylly2_mainpage.html
--
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
--------------------------------
http://www.photosig.com/userphotos.php?id=17960
http://www.pbase.com/jhsinger
D60, 28-135IS, 50mm f1.4, 75-300IS
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
Your are a good photog and these are realy good. But the proof of the pudding is in the printing. The d30 is still a great camera but you cant show all it's glory on a screenI think the D30 is still respectable. Check out some of my new
fashion pics shot yesterday.
http://rolandscarpa.com/wylly2_mainpage.html
--
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
--
Gaetan J.
'when you assume something you make an ass out of u and me' B.Hill
Peter T44178
Senior Member
These have a duotone look to them. I really like that.
What do you do to smooth out the skin - gaussian blur?
What do you do to smooth out the skin - gaussian blur?
I think the D30 is still respectable. Check out some of my new
fashion pics shot yesterday.
http://rolandscarpa.com/wylly2_mainpage.html
--
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
RolandSC
Well-known member
Hi Peter
I did not use duotones on these images but simply a color balance setting of +15 red and -15 yellow and a contrast boost using curves. Gives a nice effect. For printing with the Epson 2200 I use a setting of +8 red and -10 yellow. This prints a very nice neutral to warm tone. I made it look a little more colorful on the web.
There has been no smoothing of the skin and the grain of the skin is very visible on the originals. The photos on the website are too small to show any detail. I think its a bad idea anyway to use any kind of blurring on skin and there is no need for any kind of retouching on Wylly anyway. She has a 16 year old skin to be jealous of. ( Thats why I like to shoot babies and children)
Roland
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
I did not use duotones on these images but simply a color balance setting of +15 red and -15 yellow and a contrast boost using curves. Gives a nice effect. For printing with the Epson 2200 I use a setting of +8 red and -10 yellow. This prints a very nice neutral to warm tone. I made it look a little more colorful on the web.
There has been no smoothing of the skin and the grain of the skin is very visible on the originals. The photos on the website are too small to show any detail. I think its a bad idea anyway to use any kind of blurring on skin and there is no need for any kind of retouching on Wylly anyway. She has a 16 year old skin to be jealous of. ( Thats why I like to shoot babies and children)
Roland
--These have a duotone look to them. I really like that.
What do you do to smooth out the skin - gaussian blur?
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
Mike333
Well-known member
Is that the small white box or silverdome? Also, any strobes used?
Those photos are perfect. They couldn't be any better.
Those photos are perfect. They couldn't be any better.
This is a very simple setup. I took the pictures in a quite small
bedroom with a 500 watt Photoflex starlite in a small softbox
placed high above the subject and a spotlight at eye-level.
For this I used a simple 120watt halogen spot light bulb you can
find everywhere.
The key to get the right colors ( the b/w pics are actually very
nice in color too) is to get the exposure right. This is impossible
with a built in meter ( on any SLR) which tries to render whites
and blacks as medium grey. You have to use an ambient incident
meter like the Minolta Autometer and manual exposure. I used AWB
since there was some natural light in the room mixing with the
hotlights and the tungsten setting came out too yellow. Most of the
shots were taken between f/2.8 and f/4.3 at 125. You have to
re-measure everytime the subject moves but it's worth it.
The colors are dead on. No tweaking in Photoshop needed.
Unfortunately on the web you don't get to see the actual quality of
the images because of the extreme compression. I have printed the
originals at 13 x 19 on my Epson 2200 and they are gorgeous. Very
sharp with a nice bokeh. The Canon 85mm L lens helps a lot. The
model is a friend of mine ( she is only 16). That helps too.
Roland
--Beautiful shots!
This is the kind of lighting I would like to achieve in my own
shots. i don't have studio lights yet, but working on it. What kind
of lighting setup do you use and are you happy with the brand you
have? I just bought a d60 and am having major issues with the
autofocus, so I don't even know how good this camera can be yet.
your shots are all very sharp and free of chromatic abberations. I
hope I can get the same results out of my camera eventually. I also
would like to know what lenses you are using to get such clear
images. also, would you mind describing the lighting setup for your
latest shots. they really are wonderfull.
thanks for sharing,
Roger Kea
Here's a link to a shot I took with my old Uzi2100
http://www.pbase.com/roger_kea/cheapo_lighting
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
About 180-200mm open at f2.8 - 4? By the way, you said you use Starlites? Don't those things get hot? I would imagine they must be uncomfortable after a few minutes. Do you turn them off and only turn them on when you shoot? How do you work with those things?
roger kea93013
Well-known member
Roland,
Thanks again for the great shots. I just tried the +15 red -15yellow adjustments, but didnt get the selenium toned look you have on your site. Could you explain just a litle more about the process? I have had a really hard time with the sepia toned shot I posted. it comes out of camera looking pretty close to what you see, but I like the shade you have a litle better. Been playing with duo-tones, but not getting the perfect tone. My s9000 seems incapable of doing the shot justice as well. It gives me green in the darkest spots instead of dark browns, thanks again.
Thanks again for the great shots. I just tried the +15 red -15yellow adjustments, but didnt get the selenium toned look you have on your site. Could you explain just a litle more about the process? I have had a really hard time with the sepia toned shot I posted. it comes out of camera looking pretty close to what you see, but I like the shade you have a litle better. Been playing with duo-tones, but not getting the perfect tone. My s9000 seems incapable of doing the shot justice as well. It gives me green in the darkest spots instead of dark browns, thanks again.
there is something about what I can only describe as "the smoothness" of the colors from a D30. I wouldn't give up the pixels, but darn. They are different in a way that is hard to describe.
Great pictures Roland, thanks for sharing.
Paul
Great pictures Roland, thanks for sharing.
Paul
I think the D30 is still respectable. Check out some of my new
fashion pics shot yesterday.
http://rolandscarpa.com/wylly2_mainpage.html
--
http://www.rolandscarpa.com
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.