robertbrown

One more . . .

I've just decided to get out my Voigtlander and Lieca and put my

Canon 10D down for a long rest.<div></div>

Detail, fishing boat<div></div>

Thanks for the help. I did everything listed above and everything is printing fine now.

Derek, thanks for your help. I'm going to give it a try.

John--thank you! I hope that solves the problem--that would be too easy.

Jams, thanks for your input. I will try it when I get home tonight!

 

Also, is there any way it could be Photoshop. My son was playing with my PS CS--could he have messed up the color settings?

Try again with correct version

Here's the one with the green cast.

I'm having a problem printing 13x19 prints (only sometimes) on my

Epson 2200. The print printed fine at 8x8, but when I printed it

12x12, it took on a horrible green cast. Could this be caused by

increasing the number of pixels. Any ideas would help. Thanks.<div></div>

Jose Canseco?

I have a Tachihara 4x5 (can be bought new or in almost new condition from Midwest Photo for $500 or less): it's a nice, light, attractive wooden camera, though it's not all that sturdy. I have a Calumet c-1 8x10 and that is sturdy. For lenses, I have a 90mm, 135mm, and 240mm lenses--that pretty much covers the gamut for me. Sometimes I wish I had some extra bellows to shoot macro and/or close up. I don't use ready loads, mostly because I'm cheap. I have a darkroom and haven't had too much trouble with dust. I like my polaroid back a lot, both for test shots and polaroid transfers. I'd start out with an inexpensive 4x5, one good lens, 5 or 10 film holders and a polaroid back, then see how much you enjoy large format photography. You can always buy more gear later.

Paul, thanks for your suggestion concerning Manos. I collect photography books and I've just ordered the book from Amazon. It looks terrific. I saw from one of your comments on a photo that you live in the NW--where are you at?

 

Stelios, I know my travel plans are a little ambitious, but I like to see as much as possible when traveling--and I don't like to rest! So far, for the Peloponnese, these places are definitely on the itinerary: Mycanae, Olympia, Mistra, and probably Monemvassia, and hopefully the Lousios Gorge and Mt. Taygetos, as well stops along the way.

 

Thanks again for your help.

Steve, thanks for your input. I went to Portugal last March, so I'm expecting some cool, damp weather, though it's a little warmer and drier than where I hail from. I really liked the islands when I was there before, but I think I'd rather visit them in the summer. I enjoyed your photos, especially the one of the mural and the various octopi hanging.

I'm traveling to Greece in the middle of March, 2005 for 11 days,

with my family (wife and twins age 10). Twenty years ago I spent

about two weeks in Athens and on several of the islands: this trip

we'll probably skip the islands and spend perhaps two days in

Athens. The kids should see the Acropolis. The rest of the time

we'll spend traveling by car around the Peloponnese and central

Greece.

 

I typically spend early morning hours (wife and kids sleep in) and

late afternoons (they rest) photographing. I plan to bring a Canon

10D (with 20, 50, and 75-300 zoom), as well as Hasselblad 501,

Hasselblad Xpan, and perhaps a Holga. I like to shoot architecture

and landscapes, and there seems to be no shortage of interesting

things to photograph in Greece.

 

I'm especially interested if anyone has any places they really liked

that aren't heavily touristed. In general, we like to wander,

explore villages, and take hikes, rather than see every famous

archeological site in the country--though I'm sure we'll see our

share!

 

I'd appreciate any recommendations on interesting places to explore,

nice b&b's or hotels (prefer older, historic buildings), tasty

restaurants/tavernas, interesting wines/wineries, music, etc. Also,

if anyone knows of any Greek photographers on this site, let me

know. I'd like to check out their portfolios (I've seen Nikos

Moraitakis', though I'm not sure if he's a native or not) and

perhaps contact them. Thanks for any help.

It also needs to be fairly small--smaller than typical upload sizes.

Brian, your change is a step in the right direction, but obviously many of us would like you to go a little further . . . One 7/7 seems like enough for any particular day for me. While I'd like this the 7 limit lower, thanks for making what should be a constructive change to the site.

David Robinson is absolutely right about the "pre-rating." This certainly would be an easy thing for Brian to fix. But that's just a part of the problem.

 

I've been on Photo.net for about three years and have learned a lot here. Obviously, ratings have always been a problem area. However, at this juncture, the mate-rating is far worse than I can remember it in the past. As suggested in other threads, TRP pages based on views worked better and made it a little more difficult for the mate-raters (the current crop of which has a distinctly European flavor) and their seeming sea of 7/7's.

 

Over the years, there have been a number of viable suggestions put forth by various members to make the rating system more fair (limiting ratings, normalizing ratings, etc.), but Brian seems unwilling to make major changes. I think going back to number of ratings and not allowing people to pre-rate would be small changes that would go a LITTLE way in making the rating system more fair. At this point, those changes would be better than nothing.

 

We need to repeat the mantra: ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter ratings don't matter even though they do

Umair, unfortunately Canon's have an infrared filter that blocks out the infrared light. Nikons and some other cameras don't have this so they work much better with digital infrared. You can shoot it with your Canon using a red 25 filter. I've gotten the best results using a Nikon digital and a Harrison and Harrison (they have a website) 89b or 88a filter. I have a few shots in my Astoria Waterfront, Eagle Sanctuary and Svensen Island, Ireland, and California folders. If you have any other questions, let me know.

Dave, I've noticed they've gone way up, too. There's still the same group of mate raters with the obligatory 7/7's and I think that group has gotten larger and even more vigilant in their rating practices. I think ratings for the average Photo.net user has dropped with the anonymous rating system. Of course, this could just be my post-modern paranoia.

 

I think number of ratings, in the end, was a better method for showing TRP. Just a thought.

Venicia, I agree with you completely--there is a group who seem addicted to typing the number 7 (and, on rare occasions, a 6) on each other's photos. Blind submissions would make this more difficult and would restore some fairness to the top-rated pages.

While no PN user is going to agree with all of Brian's decisions, I think he's done his best to manage this site in an equitable manner. Considering all of the whining, complaining, cheating, and conniving he gets to deal with on a daily basis, he's done an excellent job. For anyone interested in photography, this site is a real treasure because of all the information in the archives and various discussion forums. It's too bad that he has to spend so much time settling arguments about photo ratings and then be slammed by some ill-informed hack for trying something different.

Venicia, of course you are right!

Good point, Nestor.

M. V. you do sound like an old record, but at least you're a fine photographer!