zlm

I couldn't agree with Carl more, mate rating is alive and well....

I think the problem here is that too many people just browse and maybe rate, and too often don't take the time to leave a (useful) comment.

 

I see from looking at your member page, you comment extensively; I try to do the same. For every critique request I've submitted, I've averaged about 6 comments on others' photos. I'm not claiming to be any kind of saint here, but I could only hope that my own photos got 6 comments, particularly as of late, when many have struggled to get a single comment. It's just too bad that many of the pros and amateurs alike on p.n don't seem to want to take the time to leave them.

 

As much as I admire some of those who are consistently at the top of the ratings in terms of their photography, I think their participation in the website could be much higher.

If I'm correct, the time-frame also applies to when you first upload the photo to the site, not to when you submit it for critique. Perhaps this is wrong, but that's what I believe I've observed in the past.

Thank you all for your comments. To Ken, I wasn't really looking for a super comprehensive answer, I have what I consider to be a pretty good technique for me for preparing the files for printing, just wanted a short answer for what kind of print sizes people had done with good results. I send mine to a professional developing place, White House Custom Color, I don't know their equipment exactly (they're changing from Fuji to Kodak), but great quality to my knowledge and experience. Thanks everyone again.

I was wondering what the largest print sizes people have made with a

10D that still look good. My photo printing outfit asks for 300 dpi

files, just wondering what advice people might have, thanks! I've

only had as big as 8x10 made, but I know a close friend with a

Digital Rebel had 11x15 shots made and they still looked great.

Thanks for all your responses. I feel most people are on the same plane basically, use AF most of the time, but MF when necessary. I'm a big fan of Canon lenses with full-time manual override (I don't know Nikon equipment very well, so don't know if they have the same). I find it great to bring things in focus, or almost there with the AF, and then take over with manual for any fine tuning. Thanks again for the helplful responses.

I was just curious what people who do portraiture generally use, auto

or manual focus? Obviously there are times when manual focus is a no-

brainer, but there also seem to be times when auto does a great job.

Just wondering what some others prefer to use and why? Thanks for

any replies.

Thanks for all the advice, hopefully I'll have some nice photos coming up to show from the trip!

I'm soon going to be traveling to northern Minnesota for a short

skiing/photography trip. I'll be bringing my 10D, and was wondering

if anyone had some advice for getting nice exposure with snow. I'll

probably be shooting mostly forested/lakeside (Lake Superior

shoreline) stuff. Often, if just using the camera metering, there's

an unpleasant grey tone. I've found a few things with a Google

search, but thought someone here might have some advice. Thanks a

lot for any tips.

Thanks for the input. I didn't know what the standard was for works of art in public spaces such as this. I wasn't sure if something like this was the norm, and just not as heard of, or if Chicago was making a special policy.

http://newurbanist.blogspot.com/2005/01/copyrighting-of-public-space.html

 

For some reason, a space got put into my link in the original post.

I read this article tonight and found it pretty

frightening/maddening. The link to the article is

http://newurbanist.blogspot.com/2005/01/copyrighting-of-public-

space.html I myself have visited "The Bean" twice and have taken

many pictures on each occasion. I think first of all, the idea that

they are trying to limit the "use" of this statue to certain things,

when as the article says, it was part of 270 million dollars of

public money used to build the park, and also, the fact that they

continue to waste money by having security guards monitor it, likely

for those reasons. I remember there being a large number of guards

around, more than at a normal park of this sort. Luckily, none made

such an inquiry to me as to the photographer mentioned in the

article, or I would have been quite angry and confused. I'm just

wondering what others think, especially in lieu of other such recent

bans/proposed bans (I can think of the NY subway for example).