Macro Headshot Hack

[Carlito Austin]

HelloCan any one please provide any macros to get reports from microsoft dybamics into excel i.e. i am currently using macros to transfer txt file from microsoft dynamics into excel and working on it. but if someonah has already some tools on this, it would be great to have it for my help thank you in advance,

I've downloaded data from accounting systems into spreadsheets since the early 1980s, and it can be a very powerful and easy way to create and update reports and analyses. So you're taking the right approach.

Your question is probably on the right track but your question is not stated correctly and leads me to believe you don't have a good understanding of what a Macro is or does. An Excel macro cannot get data to jump from a database into Excel. Macros are coded in VBA language but run against data already in a spreadsheet.

You may also be misusing the term Macro, when what you need to refer to is VBA Application Coding that may reside inside an Excel Code Module that has been set up to extract data from a specified downloaded report that might be either in text file format or in a version of excel, as Charlie seems to have mentioned.

The best way for you to start your adventure in coding is to use the "Record Macro" feature on the "Developer" ribbon tab, that you will have to activate from the options button. This will allow you to record all your steps inside excel, and then you can edit your code in the VBA Module.

You might be trying to do something conceptual that you aren't ready to execute. Guessing you might have some luck talking to your IT group. There is an Excel coding group on LinkedIn that might have some people who could further your learning.

As for MS Dynamics and ODBC, the version I was used to was not that difficult to create a link. The first time or two out of the box may be a bit confusing, but with a little trial and error one can find the correct files to bring into the SQL statement.

If you are using the report writer FRX with your Microsoft dynamics you can set the "output" in excel format rather than viewer or printed.. You might want to reach out to your MS dynamics consultant for more details on how to set these up. Then you determine the folder they will be directed to. You can also chain reports together for further calculations.

An even easier way to download data from MS Dynamics to Exel is SMARTLISTS, a list-ready module within Dynamics. You just pick what columns you need to see with pre-organized sets.

It is not as sophisticated as FRX reporting, yet is structurally beyond .csv downloading.

SMARTLIST is a baseline option in the software...I can't remember off the top of my head the click-through-tree to get to the option, but is relatively easy to find using Dynamic's HELP.

I have direct links into my Dynamic Tables to create dashboards and other reporting for Senior management and I also have SQL reports built as well which can give them Automated (subscription based) reports that go out as an excel attachment at the interval they request.

Most of the Dynamics financial / ERP systems have Excel based reporting - where you can print to excel. The excel files build the connection to the database in automatically without addition effort on your part.

I did a consulting gig for a Microsoft team that was using Dynamics to run part of their business. They did a system selection process that put internal solutions head to head with external solutions and they selected a product called Zap. It takes some work to get up and running but the reports are beautiful and fast.

Some photographers love using macro lenses for portraiture. Others hate it. The choice of using a macro lens when shooting portraits thus becomes an individual one which has a myriad of upsides and downsides which we will cover in this article.

For me, a macro lens begun my career as a portrait photographer. Before I ever pointed my camera at a human, I was an obsessive, hobbyist, nature photographer who mostly shot landscapes. At the time I had borrowed my dad's old Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 macro to experiment with shooting nature much closer than I was used to. Despite that lens making for a terrible macro lens, I quite enjoyed the new experience of shooting tiny nature instead of massive nature. Thus, I purchased the Tokina 100mm f/2.8 macro, which I used for shooting itty bitty things briefly until I started experimenting with portraits, which quickly led me to leaving nature photography in my rearview mirror.

As a lens that is designed to capture the tiniest of details, macro lenses are notorious for rendering some of the sharpest detail. When focus is on point, a good macro lens will resolve a crispness that few lenses can match. This helps create extremely clean, razor sharp images, that make for wonderful prints.

While there are some macro lenses which break this mold, the majority of macro lenses on the market represent focal lengths that are characterized as having a perfect balance of telephoto properties to create flattering portraits. The most common macro focal length is in the 100mm neighborhood which many headshot photographers characterize as being the perfect headshot focal length.

Have you ever been in a situation when shooting with one of your normal lenses where your camera is hunting for focus with no success only for you to realize you are a few inches too close? I've run into this problem frequently, the composition that I'm aiming for is just a hint closer than what my lens allows. The problem vanishes with a macro lens. You will never be even remotely close to pushing the limits of how near a macro lens can focus when shooting portraits.

In general, macro lenses tend to be an f-stop or so darker than a non-macro equivalent at the same focal length. The fastest macro primes on the market are f/2.8 wide open. This problem is further compounded by 1:1 macro lenses as they lose maximum aperture as they focus closer than infinity. This is just part of the physics of how a macro lens achieves its close focusing, there is really nothing the manufacturers can do to prevent it. Nikon reports this in camera to let you know what is happening (which might make a new macro user think their lens is not working properly), Canon does not share this information in camera. For example, my Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro at headshot range is more of a f/3.0-f/3.5 lens when wide open. If you are looking for a lens that is going to offer the creamiest, most buttery, shallow depth of field, a 1:1 macro lens is probably not going to get the job done for you.

Many macro lenses offer a switch to limit focus range to help reduce this problem but one reality of having a much greater range of focus is that the lens has a lot more range to scan in order for autofocus to lock in. This means if you are shooting in situations where fast, accurate, autofocus is priority a macro lens likely is going to let you down. Personally, I've also found, at least in the macro lenses that I own, the autofocus tends to be a bit less accurate than similarly priced non macro primes.

A macro lens is a specialized, lower volume product for manufacturers, which means it costs more to make, and fewer sell. This means that they generally come with a larger price tag (though there are exceptions, such as the Tokina 100mm f/2.8 macro, which is very reasonably priced).

Remember that amazing sharpness I mentioned as a benefit? To some it can also be a detriment as that extreme sharpness resolves blemishes and flaws with amazing clarity thus increasing the post production workload. To some photographers that perfect sharpness is critical, to others it is a flaw. If you are in the latter camp, a macro lens is not going to be the lens for you.

Focus breathing is when a lens's focal length seems to slightly change between max focus and minimum focus which effectively changes your frame without moving the camera. Almost all lenses suffer from this to a degree. Of all my lenses, my macro lenses suffer from this the most, presumably because of the extremely long focus distance. For example, my 150mm macro has a frame that is closer to a 135mm lens when focused at headshot range. Which I don't mind at all, personally, as I feel 135mm is the perfect portrait focal length for headshots but it is certainly a flaw worth noting

Macro lenses can make for fantastic portrait lenses, they can also make for poor portrait lenses depending on your needs or priorities for a given shoot. When deciding which portrait lens to buy keep in mind which factors above matter most to you and you will be able to easily determine if a macro lens is right for you.

Personally, even though I own multiple macro lenses, I'm still on the fence about them. In some situations I adore their results, in other situations I find myself frustrated with them. More than anything, however, I think it is about finding out if a macro lens fits nicely into your workflow or not.

If you'd like to learn how to take professional level portraits of any kind of face, the best instructor to learn from is Peter Hurley in his Perfecting the Headshot tutorial. If you purchase it now, you can save a 15% by using "ARTICLE" at checkout. Save even more with the purchase of any other tutorial in our store.

Actually, macro lenses are no different than other lenses in this way! The aperture itself doesn't change, but less light is transmitted. Normal lenses don't bother to report the number (technically t-stop) since they don't focus close enough for it to make a big difference. Since the aperture (f-stop) doesn't change, you do get the exact same bokeh you would expect of f2.8, but it's actually reporting the brightness/t-stop of the lens, so you should adjust your exposure to compensate for the new reading.

I was thrown off a little by the usage of the terms "darker" and "slower" in the context of lens designs. "darker" could also mean, the choice of glass and/or coating has an effect on the light's transmission - but the author was simply talking about the F-Stop. So the lens is simply "slower". But with slower he actually meant the focussing speed. Why stick to a terminology everyone knows and agrees on?

3a8082e126