cjk

July 10, 2014

<p>Guys, thank you so much for the great feedback. I am going to try and revise the ads to take them into account. <br>

Or I might just drop the whole thing altogether and go with selling to Adorama (face to face!). But the price they offer is way lower.... <br>

Re. sharing of personal info, I got this email from eBay saying that the buyer requested info on me (formatting got lost in the copy-paste). eBay released to them the full name and the phone number (and City / Zipcode) (I replaced them with XXX in the text below).<br>

Cheers, </p>

<p>Cesar</p>

<tbody>

<tr>

<tbody>

<tr>

<td align="left" valign="bottom"><strong>eBay sent this message to CJ Kastoun (xxxx).</strong><br />Your registered name is included to show this message originated from eBay. <a href="http://pages.ebay.com/help/confidence/name-userid-emails.html">Learn more</a>.</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

<tbody>

<tr>

<td valign="bottom" width="100%">eBay User Information Request</td>

</tr>

<tr>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

<tbody>

<tr>

<td>Dear XXXX and XXXX, <br /><br />This message is an automated reply to a contact information request made by roxxy825. This request is related to item #261528143733.

<br />Important Usage Guidelines: <br /><br />

<ul>

<li>1. This contact information should only be used for resolving matters related to eBay. Any other use is strictly prohibited.</li>

<li>2. Use of this information to complete a transaction outside of eBay is not permitted. Items purchased outside of eBay are not eligible for eBay services.</li>

</ul>

<br />

<tbody>

<tr>

<td>Contact Information for</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

<tbody>

<tr>

<td>

<tbody>

<tr>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top">CJ Kastoun</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">Company:</td>

</tr>

<tr>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">State:</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">Country:</td>

<td valign="top">United States</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">Phone:</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">Registered Since:</td>

<td valign="top">Sunday, Jul 06, 2014 07:28:41 PDT</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

<br />

<tbody>

<tr>

<td>Contact Information for</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

<tbody>

<tr>

<td>

<tbody>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">Email:</td>

<td valign="top"><a href="mailto: rox*********@outlook.com">rox*********@outlook.com</a></td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top">xxxxxx</td>

</tr>

<tr>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">Company:</td>

</tr>

<tr>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">State:</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">Country:</td>

<td valign="top">United States</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">Phone:</td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td valign="top" nowrap="nowrap" width="15%">Registered Since:</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

</td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>

July 10, 2014

I've had not so great experiences with Craig's List where people either never show up to agreed-to meetings or just keep lowballing. I was told (and read) that eBay is much better. And with over 10 Million people in and around NYC, I was hoping to find someone genuinely interested... </p>

<p>Patrick: <br>

I did that but what do you do when someone clicks the "Buy now" button? That effectively takes the item off the market and then you've lost 2-3-4 (?) days to re-list again. </p>

July 10, 2014

<p>(I posted this to the "Internet Sellers forum" but that forum doesn't seem to appear anywhere in the list of forum to browse. It only shows when creating a new post.)</p>

<p>Greetings,<br>

I am a total eBay newbie and for the first time ever, I am trying to sell something on eBay (3 lenses). To avoid risk, I listed them with "Local pick-up only" and "NO returns" but I've already received requests from people all over, including from Indonesia.<br>

Though I am not willing to deal with the hassle of shipping overseas, I have 2 potential buyers in the US (TX and CA) and I am wondering what is the safest way to manage a transaction like this?<br>

I read eBay's policies, researched the Net, etc. but can't figure just one easy reliable way. So my questions:<br>

- One of the buyers (TX) sent me a text message (I guess eBay sent them my contact info) asking for my Paypal account details (email) to pay me. My understanding is that they to pay through eBay and all the info they need to make the payment is already there. Is that correct? Is s/he trying to go around eBay's policies and procedures?<br>

- If I end up going with someone not local, what would the process look like? Is it something like the below?<br />- The click on Buy Now (or wait till the end of the auction)<br />- They use a button someone on eBay's site to pay me (through Paypal)<br />- I ship them the item (with tracking, proof of delivery, etc.)<br />- Paypal releases the money<br />- That's it (no returns, no hassles??)<br>

Any advice from regular eBay users would be much appreciated.<br>

CJK</p>

June 3, 2014

<p>Ellis: <br>

My goal was to show the dark building as if being "lit" in a similar way to the neighboring façades, so just developing an Ev + 2 version of the raw and "painting that" into the areas I want "lit" would not work as the hues are NOT similar (I tried). This could work though if I can find a way to have the overexposed version give me exactly the same hues... Not sure how to do that. I played a bit with WB but that was too imprecise. </p>

You are right, I think retouching the image taken from the bridge (image 1, which is a crop of image 3), would be a nightmare with all the light streaks, </p>

<p>Harry: <br>

Thanks for the clarification. I didn't know that. I've been fairly regularly to London for work but never took the time to actually visit properly and take photos. </p>

June 1, 2014

<p>I was in London last week and took the attached photos of Westminster and Big Ben. Unfortunately part of Westminster's façade is NOT lit, leaving a large dark square in the middle of my photos. </p>

<p>I have 2 photos that I really like and am wondering if there is a way to "light" this part in post. I tried the clone tool in Lighten mode, copying from other parts of the building that were well-lit. It looks like it might work but before embarking on an extensive retouching journey, I prefer to tap into the collective wisdom and expertise of this community to see if there is a more effective way of doing it... </p>

<p>Cheers!<br>

-CJK</p>

<p>Originals: </p>

March 3, 2014

<p>iMovie also allows you to make slideshows. It supports transitions, Ken Burns effects and multiple audio tracks. I've used it for slideshows with a few hundred photos. </p>

February 9, 2014

<p>What's clear to me from the widely varying opinions here is that there is no consensus, including among experienced photogs.</p>

<p>(same conclusion as in a previous thread: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00a90P)</p>

<p>Additional research, including on the consumer protection front, tells me that such an early failure leaves room for negotiations with Nikon for a reduced-cost repair. The usage pattern totally falls within reasonable boundaries as the camera was not pushed beyond what the manual says it can do and what Nikon itself advertises. [when a manufacturer says you can shoot 100 JPEG's non-stop, one can reasonably expect the camera not to break down at the end of that stream]. </p>

<p>Of course, if Nikon's diagnostic finds another reason for the failure, such as mishandling or a foreign object, then it's a different story. </p>

<p>Again, I appreciate the time and effort of those who contributed constructive input. I am still unable to figure out the reasons behind the obnoxiousness of some of the others who seem unable to have a civil discussion or make up their own assumptions about past usage without knowing really much about it</p>

<p>[if you really want to know:<br>

- the camera has been with my friend for almost a year now<br>

- it had ~28,000 clicks on it last time I used it<br>

- the last swim meet I shot was in spring 2012 and I shot a total of about 10 meets, each shooting about 1000 photos over 6-7 hours, usually in bursts of 3-4 photos <br>

- the swim meets were all outdoors, so never in a closed humid environment<br>

- etc, etc, etc]</p>

February 7, 2014

<p>Shun, CPM, Phil, Kari, Tom, Elliot, Rick, </p>

<p>Thank you for taking the time to write a thoughtful and constructive answer. </p>

<p>Shun: I understand your reasoning, but if you stay within the same logic (that Nikon has "crippled" the D7x00 to avoid intense pro-like usage), then any shooting the user can <em>still</em> do shouldn't harm the camera, right?. At least, they should have / would have put a warning somewhere in the manual against exceeding certain limits of repeat shooting. </p>

<p>On the D7000's webpage (http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7000/features03.htm), they tout the shutter as a "highly durable shutter unit proven by 150,000 cycles". I am perfectly familiar with statistics: failing at 66,000 actuations means either an abnormally early failure (hence my mentioning the possibility of this qualifying as a manufacturing defect) or that the shutter's life expectancy distribution curve is very very flat, rendering it meaningless. The latter would have meant countless D7000 having their shutter fail way before the 150,000 cycles, which I imagine would have made some noise in the market… </p>

<p>Put differently: if one assumes that the average consumer upgrades his/her D-SLR every 5 years, then normal usage would mean about 30,000 actuations a year. This D7000 has 66,000 actuations in 3 years, very much under the expected number. </p>

<p>Kari: thank you for the suggestion on checking the accuracy of the diagnostic. Will see if that's feasible where he currently is. </p>

<p>Rick: that's what I am leaning towards too. Something might have gotten inside the camera and did the destructive work. </p>

<p>One more thing to clarify to the folks who gave me advice about not lending to friends, etc. The relation is a little more complex that what I described. The main purpose of my description was to make it clear that 1) the incident did not happen with me and 2) the camera is about 7,000 miles away so I cannot easily check it or get it checked quickly by Nikon USA. But advice on lending well taken -- for another time. Just not applicable here :)</p>

<p>Lastly, I will NOT get into a debate with the folks who, not having anything constructive to contribute, seem to enjoy going into personal attacks. I enjoy the friendly atmosphere of Photo.Net and refuse to get into this kind of useless character attacks. </p>

February 7, 2014

<p>So I lent my D7000 to a friend of mine who is traveling in the Middle East. He's a relatively experienced photographer. </p>

<p>He used it on a stop-motion project (for a grant), where he was shooting in high speed over multiple rounds . He took 150 - 200 photos each round. Each round lasted about 3 - 5 minutes. After 4-5 rounds, the camera gave him an ERR message and stopped working.</p>

<p>A trip to the local Nikon dealer diagnosed a shutter curtain bent (to the outside, so the sensor should be fine) and the dealer is asking for $450 to repair them lcoally. </p>

<p>Shouldn't the camera be able to handle this level of shooting? I've used myself to shoot full-day swim meets and took more photos that this in high-speed bursts without any problem. </p>

<p>Could this fall under a manufacturing defect that Nikon US should repair for free? (total shutter count is at about 66,000). Camera was bought on Amazon in January 2011.</p>

<p>Thanks for your advice.<br>

-CJK</p>

January 31, 2014

<p>I just came across this: </p>

<p>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Memory-Card-Back-up-Devices/ci/3369/N/4000227848</p>

January 15, 2014

<p>Still with the Polar Vortex theme...</p>

January 15, 2014

<p>Oops - photo attached</p><div>

00cJPH-544868284.jpg.5eb321ae71ef3995d7a68ed073471680.jpg

</div>

January 15, 2014

<p>and freezing outside...</p>

January 15, 2014

<p>Definitely some oddness going on here, though not all of it totally out-of-context. <br>

Polar vortex in New York City… </p>

December 12, 2013

Alan: Thanks!

Peter: not sure what you mean by "remove colors". I will try to download the trial.

Lenny: Indeed a piecemeal approach is the only option. I had good results when on sky or cloud background (with the red

channel). Cables on stone is extremely challenging, specially the vertical cables. I tried Quick Mask then Refine Edge but

that lead nowhere. Now I've been trying to select each cable with the pen tool. Mind boggling long procedure. I will give it

a few more hours tomorrow and see where it leads me...

December 11, 2013

<p>Hi there, <br>

I would like to separate various elements in the attached photo in order to do selective adjustments. The elements I want to treat separately are: <br>

- The Bridge<br>

- The cables (the "web")<br>

- The sky<br>

- The clouds<br>

I'm relatively comfortable using various Photoshop tools and built a relatively decent selection for the sky and the clouds but I can't seem to be able to determine the right selection strategy for the "web". <br>

Can someone suggest an approach that could work? <br>

Thanks<br>

Cesar</p>

December 1, 2013

<p>Just came across this by chance. The 10, 6 & 3 stop filters are very expensive but outstanding. I've been using them for the past month or so and love them. <br>

Offer lasts till end of day today. <br>

http://www.bwvision.com/black-friday-offers/</p>

November 21, 2013

Just keep in mind that the above is valid only for available light exposure. If you're using flash, it's a different story.

November 21, 2013

Good tips, thanks.

This is one wicked website you've got. I just spent almost an hour going through it. The photos are the stuff nightmares

are made of!

Cheers,

CJ

November 21, 2013

<p>Tim, <br /> You are right, I have no evidence whatsoever to connect the Adobe hack to the fraudulent charges on my card. In the OP of the thread I wrote on this about 10 days ago (the one that disappeared), I was very careful in saying I had just a suspicion there was a link, based on timing but no proof. My wording got sloppier in this thread (though I still do not explicitly say it's connected!). And no, Amex's CSR did not mention Adobe at all.<br>

<br /> Anyway, i am a little bit surprised about the stats you mention because, knowing a little bit the credit card industry, my hunch is that there a lot MORE fraud than what we know. It is mostly smaller amounts, making it much less economically interesting for credit card companies to criminally prosecute. Add to that the fact that some of that fraud is done by the clients themselves (as opposed to gangsters) and you can imagine that there is a lot that's being kept hush-hush. <br>

Re. this being victimless, I wouldn't be so sure. I peruse my cc statements very carefully but I am sure there are other people who don't.</p>

November 21, 2013

<p>Andrew: I actually didn't have to pay anything. </p>

<p>I guess saying "Amex was very prompt at dealing with this" wasn't very clear. Not sure about the $50 max but Amex lifted all the charges and their fraud team is dealing with this now, probably through legal venues considering the large amount (or so I hope - the charges were all made at 2 Shell stations in Montréal -- over 50 small charges of $20 each and a handful of larger ones -- and I really would like to see the S-O-B's behind bars!). <br>

<br>

What made my case crazy is that the charges were made with a physical card, i.e. the fraudsters were able to create a plastic with all my credit card's info and juste swipe it at the vendor. Thankfully, I had made purchases in stores next to where I live (US, about 7h away from Montréal) around the same time as the fraudulent charges… And I haven't been to Canada since 2009… </p>

November 21, 2013

<p>My credit card information was stolen from Adobe's website and I had almost $3,000 of fraudulent charges on my card about 3 weeks ago. Thankfully Amex was very prompt at dealing with this. <br>

(I had actually written a post on this to warn other Photo.net members but for some unexplained reason, my post was deleted. Cara was looking into it). </p>

<p>I like the idea of one-time card numbers like Citi's VAN that also have spending limits associated with them. Not sure why more companies don't offer that.</p>

<p>That said and while credit card companies make it relatively easy to have fraudulent charges taken off, the risk of identify fraud is still there. I am not sure how it can be reduced, since one still has to give PII to do most online commerce (which is understandable). </p>

November 12, 2013

<p>Dan: true but in this case, most of the "models" were … fish, so I don't think they'd bother.<br>

:)</p>

November 8, 2013

<p>Stephen: <br>

You are correct in assuming that I want only the market owner and/or the fisheries involved to utilize the work. But even for them, i would NOT want them to sell the photos, just be able to use them for the promotion of their businesses. </p>

<p>If I read you well, then I guess the way to go would be for me to publish the photos under a very restrictive policy (no copying, no using, etc.) -- maybe the CC license that says "No derivatives, no commercial use" and mention in my email to the owner and the fisheries that I grant <strong>them</strong> a <strong>"license to use the photos for the promotion of their businesses and of the market, excluding sales of any of the photos". </strong></p>

<p>Craig:<br>

you're almost there, but not exactly. The Fulton fish market moved to Huntspoint in the Bronx. The market I shot is called the New Amsterdam Market (http://newamsterdammarket.org). They group local food purveyors that favor sustainability and are trying to push for the preservation of the original Fulton Fish Market building at the Seaport. My friend is on the Board. I am not aware of any controversy associated with them but then again, I only got involved recently and only for this shoot. <br>

You can actually see the photos at http://cjks.smugmug.com/New-Amsterdam-Market-Fisheries<br>

Cheers, </p>

November 8, 2013

<p>I am looking for some advice on the following: I recently went to a fish market to shoot some photos of the fisheries selling there. I offered to shoot the photos to a friend of mine, who is a friend of the market owner. Unpaid and informal gig. </p>

<p>I would like now to share the photos with the market owner and the fisheries. I am happy for them to use the photos to promote their businesses (website, flyers, etc.). <strong>Only restriction I wish is that no one sells the photos.</strong> </p>

<p>I looked at the <strong>Creative Commons</strong> licenses but neither of the 2 options seem to work: <br>

"<strong>Commercial</strong>" seems to mean that they could also sell the photos for $. <br>

"<strong>Non-commercial</strong>" would not allow them to use the photos for the promotion of their businesses. I did a lot of research on the web and that seems to be the most common interpretation. </p>

<p>Did anyone here come across this situation? If so, how did you handle it? <br>

Any advice would be appreciated. <br>

I am <strong>based in NYC</strong> (the market as well) and these are mostly NY-based fisheries. </p>

<p>Thanks<br>

CJK</p>

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by cjk