Published: Monday 16th of September 2013 01:35:57 AM
Meir: Welcome Back!
You never replied to my letter, so I worried.
I figured when you were ready, you would make your presence known.
I've upgraded (in the sense of number of megapixels) to a higher resolution camera, so native resolution now is 24 megapixels from formerly most which had at most 12 megapixels and one had 16 or so megapixels, so when I process the native files, I have a hard time on my three computers with handling the large files, especially with what appears to be 'memory hog' Photoshop CC which requires an unusually large amount of RAM to 'upconvert' to 24-inch files, which I do routinely for saving to a Cloud service I use. Twenty-four inch files are the larges size files they allow, but only in JPEG.
I don't save Photoshop files there or .TIFF files because they are memory hogs and the service specifically disallows those formats and only allows JPEGS, GIFS and some other more rudimentary file formats, so for maximum resolution I am stuck with the maximum size JPEGS, and that means 24-inch upconversions.
Now with upconverting on Adobe Photoshop CC, I often run out of RAM and get 'out of RAM memory reminders and the system either shuts down, freezes, or starts the whole process by writing and reading to the hard disk (and reverse) instead of to RAM, which Windows is designed to do in specific circumstances, but it takes FOREVER.
Like time to prepare dinner (for sixteen) just to upconvert a 24 megapixel file with 20-inch native resolution to 24-inch JPEG with a few browser windows open, Photoshop CC open, maybe Bridge open and so everything is very slow.
I'm planning to add more RAM, but my tech says my laptop maxes out at 4 GIGs, though I have a store of 8 Gigs RAM next to me for installation, but no place to put it on the motherboard -- damn Lenovo!
On the two desktops, one has 2 gigs of RAM (which once was fine) and the other has 4 gigs, which sometimes is OK, but I plan to upgrade both, especially the latter which has an I-5 processor.
And maybe I'll just have one desktop built with an I-7 processor, a superfast motherboard, a superfast graphics card and 16 megabytes of RAM and all my dreams (in that regard) will come true.
I hope you do understand this.
I copy my files a lot for safekeeping, but on review, some of my file are corrupted, as shown by photos that show one level of brightness for half or so of their height and another level for the remainder.
That appears to have been the result of voltage spikes that occurred during copying or some other jam up in the computer during copying, then copies of copies and copies of those copies resulted in the formerly unseen erroneous copies being propagated.
But I have my ORIGINALS for source, and am now copying from the original files again and conforming all the rest in terms of file size -- number of files (photos) etc.
As a failsafe, from the start, I started saving ALL files in various sizes of JPEGS, and also .psd files (Photoshop), but on finding out that .psd files were so proprietary and could be changed with a change in the corporate fortune of Adobe and were NOT open source, I changed to TIFF. After all, .psd files are just one proprietary version of TIFF files anyway, but in any case, memory is CHEAP, with 3 terabytes, holding half of a lifetime's work selling for $100 dollars or so where I buy things, so what's the fuss about 'large files' or large memory?
Memory keeps getting bigger and bigger -- my idea which I have implemented it to make copies of copies and then place them strategically where NO one destruction of a set of hard drives could result in the whole set's' being destroyed. That includes expensive SCANS of some of my earlier work for which I have paid a fortune using the best scanners available (more than once, with one type of scanner favoring one or more photos and another type favoring prints of another type of photo -- original negatives in many were lost, but prints were ACES for quality).
What you see in many cases in my older photos are copy internegs that have been scanned made from early but wonderful prints and the negs lost. In other cases, I still have found some of the original negs, after 40 years to my surprise . . . . I am sure you can tell the difference, but in historical documents, standards were different in 1968-1972 than they are now for printing and other reproduction for most uses (maybe not museum and galleries but you get the point I think).
It's nice to have you back with your piss and vinegar (and your knowledge to which I pay great attention.)
An aside: My reply was comment No. 16999, about half or so mine and the other half from viewers and commenters, roughly.
My profile photo has changed. I exchanged the guns for a milk shake. Ice Cream shop on the street I live on and my favorite swing.
A slightly lighter copy has been uploaded. If you have viewed this previously, please let the new version work its way through Photo.net's at least three servers and also press F5 or Control + F5 simultaneously to refresh your browser or otherwise refresh it according to directions.
I hope that helps.
I like the composition with its depth and the V formed by the two protagonists. The pleasant woman is evidently a vendor, the other gent if you say so. I like the striding hooded figure beyond her for the scale he furnishes. I'm not so sure of the processing of this image - the lighting seems 'imposed'.
I have been 'under the weather' for over six months, and recently ventured out for three hours, three fabulous hours, with a camera, for almost the first time, and what you basically have been seeing for some time, with some exceptions while I have been getting 'treatment' is reruns and taken during interruptions in 'treatment' which was 'long term' to say the least and has probably saved my life, left me extremely weak, but apparently has not harmed my eye, but only sharpened it. The 'treatment' was mandatory, but I could have gotten it at any time, and just had to have it under penalty of bad things, and now my life's been extended to just about forever, or whatever God had in mind for me when he put me on this earth . . . . according to the odds, so no worries as I try to get stronger.
Believe it or not, this is a lesser shot from the few hour's shooting, but just the first one that appeared on my computer. Some are great fun, too, and will make a later appearance -- a 24- megapixel camera is jamming my available memory when I up-convert to 24-inch size 'saves' on Adobe Photoshop CC -- I just get 'out of ram' notifications with my 4 GB ram when I try to convert to 24 in., and must wait till a reinstall of my crashed desktop which has been down with all my essential data I need for other business, and I don't have the money to do it right now. I convert every capture I process to web size, 12 inch, 24 inch, photoshop (psd) and .tiff 16-bit, in case in copying there is a voltage fluctuation (as there has been and my files can attest with half cut off copies of photos in my voluminous 'saved' files . . . . and I HATE to reprocess photos.
In this photo, notice there's a translucent (greenish) overhead arch, the man's wearing a purplish top (all of which threw the color metering way off), his cap brim more than shades his face, and to bring out his face requires using too much shadow highlight filter and really destroying (in my view) the photo. If you look carefully, you can see the glow in his eyes in the darkness of the brim shade.
Of course there's the comic element of the second vendor who was caught in a rare moment when not hiding (people often try to hide and I often try to 'catch' them not hiding, and when they think they've 'pulled one over on me' -- fat chance!).
You are right about the dimensionality of the hooded character (girl) descending the stairs to the Metro, right and also forming a line of people, left to right and also a 'diagonal' if you look at it the way I see it.
Also, compositionally, there's an arch overhead and directly under that arch there's an inverted 'V' at just the right point so the two intersect where the arch rises vertically before turning (at the apex of the 'V' of the two vendors. I like that, and it's one reason for choosing this one for posting. I like a little geometry with my 'street', as those who follow me will notice.
I like your honest critiques -- they keep me on my toes. The lighting here is problematic, and worse in color, keeping skin tones because the man's shirt (purplish) and the greenish filtered light from overhead threw off the meter somewhat resulting in very hard skin tones to process in color, though I tried mightily and succeeded only partially. Someday, somewhere I may post the color version, but not now.
Best to you, and thanks.
re the above...I have much "to do" about image information lost in convertion to jpg and once upon a time heeded that advice, and yet I have shot digital in color and b&w, in tiffs and jpg; converted raw files to tiff and to jpg; scanned film and saved in tiff and in jpg and I cannot see any difference in tone or resolution on a monitor (even when displayed in 'actual pixels') or a 12"x18" print (don't know about color rendition). For my purposes -or any I can image- tiff files are a waste of hard drive space.
I do not understand this conversion to size in inches and the purpose as described above but that is too compicated for me to discuss here.
No John, I did not understand. Much to complicated for me. I shall trudge along with what I already have and save the shekels I could have spent for the nursing home or my funeral -whichever comes first. Thanks for your reply. The tones on the man's face to the left are very good. Much like the example I once sent. I did not see any email.
Meir, I thought of you and your example
Meir, I thought of you and your example(s) when I worked on the very hard to achieve tones on the man's face, left.
It was an almost agonizing ordeal, since the camera did not expose the face correctly (or at least nearly as it is shown here), but I persevered, guided by your 'lessons' as best I remembered them.
Those photos you provided me were invaluable lessons on tonality - for which I am very thankful.
I looked at your photo on your bio page, and you look as though you''re going to 'take out' death before it comes and gets you . . . .
I don't blame you for being armed, even double armed, considering the hostility faced by the people of your country by your 'neighbors'.
I'm only now beginning to fathom the degree of absolute hatred they feel, after years of traveling and listening to anti-Semitic anti-Jewish screed and figuring it was just part of Arab/Muslim character, but now I know it's much more than that.
Why didn't the neighbor states take in the Palestinians instead of letting them go 'homeless' for so many decades, or why didn't they pull themselves up by the bootstraps?
Memories are long in your stretch of the desert, where once Jews, Arabs and Christians lived and played side by side and once I am told were amicable neighbors -- at least I read that . . . . and Muslim women showed their hair even if they wore the hajib according to now extant family albums seen by photo historians and others . . . .
My how things have changed. (and not for the better)
Good health to you Meir. I hope you have no instance to use your sidearms.
by "too complicated to discuss" meaning to complicated to explain my confusion.
This photo is best viewed 'large' to appreciate the 'tones' and its brightness, as opposed to thumbnail viewing.
'Two Vendors' Two vendors pass an overcast weekend day selling nick knacks and comestibles at a Metro entrance in Kyiv, Ukraine. Your critiques, ratings, and observations are invited and most welcome. If you rate harshly, very critically, or wish to make a remark, please submit a helpful and constructive comment; please share your photographic knowledge to help improve my photography. Thanks! Enjoy! john