hanna_cowpe

<p>Thanks for your response. I have also, since posting, learned that the C730 will take the smart media card which came with earlier models. I have those but have yet to try them.</p>

<p>Can anyone suggest where I might buy an XD memory card for an Olympus C730 Ultra Zoom. Current cards are not compatible. Thanks.</p>

I shoot with a Canon XT and the 70-300 IS lens. The IS (Image stabilization) has two modes, 1 for subjects moving in any direction and one for subjects moving in one direction with the camera. I can't speak for Nikon on that. Mine is a fairly slow lens and having a background which provides good contrast for the bird, such as blue sky or water, helps in focusing. A longer lens would be too heavy for me and using a tripod is too restricting , but you may wish to try that. But IS is not recommended on a tripod. A monopod will provide some stability, or a Bushhawk, which rests on your shoulders and supports the camera. A 500mm lens would give you better reach for distant birds, but it can be a disadvantage when birds are closer and you can't zoom out. So there are pros and cons for short and long lenses. It takes alot of practice to get to know the birds' behaviour so you can second guess what they will do. On windy days the birds sometimes "hang" in the wind, particularly seabirds, which helps a little as it slows them down. If you are able to shoot by the sea, try sitting by the shore where the birds gather, and brace your elbows on your knees. That provides some stability and also puts you at eye level when the birds are near the water. The important thing to focus on is the eye. If that is sharp it's sometimes acceptable for other parts to be blurred by movement. It takes lots and lots of practice and patience but you will get better at it. Good luck and have fun.

Years ago, there was a member directory, where all the names of the members was listed. That no longer exists, but there is a "who's online" feature which at least gives you names of the women currently active. So you can go to their portfolios from there. Keep checking there at different times of the day and that should cover most of us.

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll try them out if I haven't already done so.

I have an Epson Stylus R280 that prints with a green cast. I have increased the magenta on the printer profile with

some success but am not entirely happy with the results. Is there another element that might influence this?

A shutter speed of 1/25 is not very fast, so even an undetectable breeze could cause blur. Even if you are using a tripod there could be vibration, particularly if you're not using a cable release. You should be able to increase your ISO to 200 or even 400 without noise. What you are interpretting as noise or blur on your posted images could be just lack of depth and detail due to your wide aperture. I would suggest doing without the flash as it causes glare from the water on the leaves, particularly if the sun is shining. I find bright overcast conditions provide more saturated colours and less glare You might also try moving further away from your subject and zooming. Maintain your wide aperture but focus on one leaf or branch in the foreground, such as the branch infront of the trunk. Isolating that area with sharpness and detail and throwing the background leaves more out of focus will have more impact, while retaining the colour of the background leaves. You could also underexpose a little as the dark trunk is causing slight overexposure of the pale leaves. Don't get frustrated, just enjoy your surroundings and don't be afraid to experiment.

Yes, Die-Nasty would be more appropriate. Thanks Bryan.

Has anyone had any dealings with these people? Anything good or bad to say?

I bought my last camera body 26 months ago for $960. I've used it just about every day since then. That works out to a cost of about $1.20 a day. I could just about buy a cup of coffee for that, and I don't much like coffee. So I reckon $1.20 a day provides a whole lot of fun and I'm getting a pretty good deal, even if my camera gives up tomorrow. And for every extra day I get to use it, that cup of coffee is looking more like a bad deal.

I may be way off base with this so I'm happy to be corrected here. I have often noticed that when using a polarizer,

the details in the image appear flattened, giving a slightly unsharp appearance. I frequently shoot the same scene

with various degrees of polarization and without polarizer and find the shot without the polarizer seems sharper. I

wonder if the loss of highlight details through polarization reduce contrast and thereby reduce apparent sharpness.

Some of the detail in the shingles on the right side of the roof, where there is little tonal variation or shadow, look a

little flat to me.

Well that would answer David Ob's earlier thread in this forum asking "How is it that no women participate in this forum?" They're too busy juggling the baby and Bizymoms.com.

With the wealth of photographic opportunities in the southwest of England and Wales I wouldn't spend time travelling to London. I think they are getting a little touchy about photographers there anyway. Concentrate on Wales and you will find a vast array of landscapes from lush valleys to barren hillsides, mining villages to sandy beaches, quaint villages and university cities. The scenery can be breathtaking and early stone farm buildings and cottages full of character. And if you still have time, travel through the Wye Valley and cross the Severn back to England and visit the Roman/Georgian city of Bath in Avon, with its beautiful architecture and the Kennet and Avon Canal.

I have the same camera and lens and the image looks about right to me, particularly if you haven't sharpened it for upload. The sharpest area with the most contrast is around the collar point and neck closure and everything else is slightly soft, probably because of the wide aperture and narrow DOF.

Well, a great and varied response to my question. Technically a shot will always be better with a tripod, but sometimes the creativity and spontaneity is lost when I'm tied to it. I suppose it depends on one's style, and physical tolerance. I don't mind crawling around to get into places where it's difficult to manoevre my tripod but I do mind standing still, with arched neck setting up a shot that disappears while I'm doing it, or where I could get just the angle I want freehand. I guess it's all down to discipline; something I have to work at.

In your personal experience, do you think you've missed more good shots by being tied to a tripod than you've ruined

by not using a tripod? Some photographers advocate using them at all times. I accept there are many situations

when a tripod is a must. I'm fairly dedicated to using one, but there are times when I get such a crick in my

creativity that I just have to pull the release and get on with it freehand. I'm sure there are shots I would have missed

otherwise. What else is IS for?

When I edit my portfolio, I try to leave the images that have the most helpful critiques. They are not necessarily my most favoured ones but they are the ones most useful to others. Unfortunately, critiques aren't what they used to be.

Great response, and I think all the answers pretty well concur with my interpretation.

 

Charles Becker, that was my poor choice of words, and even as I wrote it I knew someone would pick me up on it. It was late and I was lazy. What I should have said was a recognizable subject. While painters, sculptors or other artists begin from scratch and form the abstract in their mind, I see a photographic abstract as something that starts as a known subject and becomes unrecognizable, which is pretty much what Thomas Rivinius has said.

 

Gordon Bowbrick, I have the same feeling about Fine Art. I'm never sure if the subject is required to be fine art, or the photographic representation of it.

 

Regarding the dilemma posed by lack of categories, possibly one for "impressionistic" would cover anything that was recognizable but has had some in-camera or PS treatment to give an impressionist effect.

While browsing through the 'abstract' category, I came across many images that didn't fit my concept of abstract. I

see it as an image that portrays a commonly known subject in such a way that it is not recognizable as such,

through means of unconventional angles, vantage points and perspectives and/or elimination of particular elements of

said subject. I accept that some photos may have been put in this catgegory for want of a more suitable one, but it

made me curious as to how other people interpret the meaning of 'abstract' . This isn't a complaint, but rather a

search for variations on the theme.

Abner, I use Paintshop Pro. When I open the image file I click on the heading 'Image' and it gives the option of resizeing by pixel dimensions or by percentage of original image. I assume your program will have something similar.

Christal, in the headings under your posted image, click on Options and then on Edit image info. It will give you your upload page where you can change any info you want and then refresh. All your comments and ratings will remain as they were with your correction in place.

Lex, thanks for your response. I have to admit I had to go out into my garden and bash a few plants before I responded to John's enlightened comment.

http://www.photo.net/photo/7467140

 

Need I say more?

I have been a Photo.net member for seven years and during that time I have watched the quality and quantity of critiques go steadily downhill. At one time there were several knowledgeable and even professional photographers who were willing to give frank and constructive advice. But people took things personally and feathers got ruffled. Prima donnas got their knickers in a knot and threats were made. Since then the membership numbers have increased considerably and the majority don't give a hoot about honest critique. The requirement to post an image in the critique forum inorder to qualify for the TRP rate recent queue puts a huge number of photos requesting critiques that aren't really wanted. That in turn results in streams of three-word comments, and when amongst those is placed a real critique, it frequently is ignored, argued or abused. In my personal experience, when posting a request for critique, ask a specific question about your image and it will give respondents something to focus on. I have also become increasingly discouraged by the lack of response to critiques I have made. It's just plain good manners to respond to someone's efforts to reply to a request. I'm not talking about the Wows and the Nice Pics, but the helpful comments and suggestions.

Chris, I lived in England for 20 years and was robbed or burgled no less than seven times. There are people with sticky fingers everywhere. Just be sensible and keep your gear attached to you at all times. And make sure you have receipts and insurance in case you're unlucky.