pmac

Shoot Raw.<br>

Shoot a white card in same light.<br>

White balance in post processing using card image.<br>

Best, Paul

That was pretty funny, and not a little disconcerting, Brian. I think I'll have some of what you're having.

Ooooh! - tough crowd - (all true, though)

1141465

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/1141465-md.jpg"></br></br>Cottage</center>

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/764461-md.jpg"><br/><br/>Shack</center>

Sorry, that last one was crap, my jpg resizer went wild - try another image with html

<p>

<center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/737068-md.jpg"></br></br>Croft</center></p>

Small house<div></div>

Hmmm.... Try again<div></div>

Intelligence<div></div>

Well said, Matt.Appreciation is often felt but rarely stated.

Hi Bob

 

<p>Try <a href="http://www.photographersdirect.com/sellers/index.asp">

Photographers Direct</a> They're free to join, you have to pass a quality control test, and your photos do sell for fairly decent money - only prob is they're a UK firm, so getting paid by the buyer can be complex.</p>

 

<p>Best o' luck</p>

 

Paul

<p>There are numerous sites doing this very thing, where I think PN would excel and have a niche is in emphasis on quality of print.</p>

 

<p> Why not specify a minimum PPI (300?) for any given print size, then charge PNetters a per Mb annual price for uploading and storing their for-print files, which could be thumbnailed for viewing in a special for-print-only gallery (maybe giving members a discount, charge more for non members). Let members set their own price, then as prints are purchased, a 50/50 or thereabouts split of net profit (after actual print & mailing costs).</p>

 

 

<p>

Having an 'for-print-only' gallery with no rating ability would obviate much of the jostling for visibility previosly mentioned. Also no 'this print has been purchased x times' - no stats of any kind - let the prospective purchaser make up their mind purely on the potential of the image to enhance their lives, with no statistical preconceptions. There should of course be space for the photographer to record his or her own remarks on any image, as this adds to the value.

In addition, since you are already setting up for image sales of a sort, why not allow keyword entry and a searchable database of for-sale images, and let people also sell digital-only files, as a kind of high quality 'art' stock agency? This would add very little cost to the project, and may add substantial profit.</p>

 

<p> As Bob said, the devil's in the fulfilment and as PN is taking all the hassle it should definitely see a good profit potential before embarking on what is bound to be a large and probably onerous (given the grouch factor of the average PNetter!) project. </p>

 

<p>I do hope this works out though, could be good for both PN and PNetters. Details (such as model releases etc.) would have to be hammered out. But thanks for asking the membership, and Best of luck to you Brian!</p>

So it would be permissible to photograph a street performer playing music, but not make an audio recording. Conversely, would it be OK to audio record, but not photograph, say a juggler or a stilt walker, because their commercial enterprise is visual, not musical?

And of course the guy with his guitar is not a commecial enterprise?

"Why is it that there is no objection to SEEING something, but there is to RECORDING the same information. "

 

Go to a Symphony show. Ask them "Why is it that there is no objection to SEEING and HEARING something, but there is to RECORDING the same information."

Yeah - Fells Point Oktoberfest - mmmmm...

Pit Beef<div></div>

Almost 100% sure, it's the contacts - for both lens and camera body, take a pencil ereaser and gently clean the contacts with it. Do this infrequently, maybe once a month, should clear the problem.

 

Luck, Paul

...and it had a crooked man<div></div>

Works on Mozilla too, with right plug-in.

I have a number of different makes, including Cokin. If you are only looking for a colored piece of plastic, Cokin is fine, but when I used Cokin grey grads with slide film, for instance, I found that they weren't grey at all, but were in fact purple (Jimi would have loved them - so would Prince!). The best I can say was that the effect was 'interesting'. On careful reading of the litreature, I found that Cokin don't actually call them 'neutral density', or use the word 'neutral' anywhere. I guess you get what you pay for.

Professor Longhair<div></div>

1228 Decatur<div></div>

Pirates Alley<div></div>

Tuba<div></div>