tijean
-
Posts
139 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by tijean
-
-
While fetching the error for Giampi, I discovered that it does still exist for photos being uploaded to a portfolio.
<br><br>
Some JPGs spit back this error:<br><br>
----------<br>
We had a problem processing your entry:
File contains xml-encoded preview data. For more information on this problem, and suggestions on how to correct it, please read our page, Problems with Photoshop 7 JPEG images
<br><br>
Please back up using your browser, correct it, and resubmit your entry. <br>
Thank you. <br>
----------
<br>
This is the page that it links to: <a href="http://www.photo.net/ps7-problems.html" target="_blank">http://www.photo.net/ps7-problems.html</a>
-
Steve Kay,
I have had my e-mail requested by members in the past who have then decided not to e-mail me. The worse I have gotten from the experience has been an e-mail from someone running a tsunami scan (I am a tsunami survivor, please send me photo equipment and money, ect.).
I understand your concern. The implementation of a system that would e-mail and ask your permission before sending out your contact information (apologies if I am misreading, but this seems like the application of your solution) would be cumbersome. The other problem is that I have had a variety of helpful, informative, and/or just friendly e-mails from memebers whose names I would not have recognize and may have denied access to if given the chance and worried about privacy.
It seems to me that it would be easier to just have a free hotmail, gmail, ect. account for things such as this. A bit of a headache, but such is the way of internet privacy. That way, if it has found its way on to a spammer's list, you could delete it and create another without having to notify friends and family.
-
-
I'd have to agree on the silver's "limited" status, though I have not seen it in the states or at B&H. As for subjects, I shoot a little of each, really, but I have had some experience shooting moving objects (i.e. cousins) without any problems. This seems like an odd question, as the max shutter speed is 1/4000th.
-
Great, I'm back to where I started - wanting one of each! :-)
Thank you so much for all of the information. I am trying to use my 35mm/DSLR shooting preferances to choose a lens, which isn't a great idea because this is a whole different beast with a whole different purpose. For a first lens, I guess I would rather have a bit too wide than not wide enough, as the 6x7 format will not suffer nearly as much cropping a tiny bit like 35mm and digital.
Okay, so the plan is a 90 and then possibly a 55 later on. This will be about like a 45mm and a 28mm, which is really perfect for how I shoot out in the field. I use a 31mm and 50mm for 35mm work now and my only complaint about focal length is that the 50 is just a hair too long. I will consider picking up something longer if I feel the need - when I start seeing lots of shots I need a 200 for AND when my wallet has refueled.
As for the 75/2.8: Definately out. It sounds like an absolutely superb lens, but IF I could find it, I couldn't afford it. It'll have to be religated to the "one day" list for now. The main reason I can now get into a 67 system is because of the falling prices, but this puppy bumps everything out of the "doable" bracket real fast.
-
As soon as I have a few more pennies saved, I think I'm going to
finally take the plunge and buy an 6X7 (newer of the old series with
MLU) but I am having trouble deciding on a lens. I am a one lens kind
of shooter, which is handy considering my budget. I used the 50/2.0
that came on my old K-1000 in the neighborhood of 8 years before
getting another. I am interested in the slight wide to normal range.
I read a bit on this forum about the 75 4.5 and was sufficently
scared off. What about the 55 3.5 and 4? A bit wide, but possibly a
good thing, considering that the 6x7 will be dedicated mostly to
landscape/nature work. There was also some talk about a 75 2.8 but I
cannot seem to find it listed for sale anywhere. Any thoughts on it's
availability/price/quality? I guess the last to consider (from what I
know thus far) is the 90 2.8.
I do have to admit, I am leaning towards the slight wides. Okay, on
with the wisdom. Please? Feel free to pawn me off to posts I missed
(I read the topic list and a few threads down to 2003) or websites
that would be useful.
Thanks!
-
Here's a thought:
The sharpest aperture on most lenses is between f8 and f11, and both will get everything in focus when focused to infinity or enough in focus that you need not worry about getting the whole flower in focus but that distant tree blurred in as background when hovering over a flower. I usually keep my aperture on f8 in M or Av modes for exactly this reason and maybe Pentax is thinking the same thing.
Just a guess.
-
I am a little late to the game here, but I thought I'd add my two cents. The lens is soft and produces muted colors and low contrast. Whether that's bad or not is totally dependant on application, and with HP5, coloration wouldn't matter much to you. It's not the world's greatest lens, but I don't know if I put it at the absolute bottom of the barrel, like others have.
<br><br>
But with regards to flair, it's is awful. Terrible. I wish I had some samples, but it has had limited use on the film cameras and the duds on the *istDS get deleted.
<br><br>
Here are some samples: <a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=13534010" target="_blank">posted at dpreview</a>.
<br><br><br><br>
P.S. I've had better luck pushing plain-jane Delta, but that's so totally subjective.
-
To the best of my knowledge, there is no way to change the catagory a picture is listed in for RFC. You will have to delete the image, resumbit it, and submit it for RFC when you have another chance (once a day for nonsubscribers).
-
Vincent,
I am not a moron. I don't need you to explain the concept of mate-rating to me, but if you are going to harp on Brian for not going after certain people, than why don't you please tell us (at long last) what objective, data-driven approach he could use.
Note: "I think that pictures realy bad, but they rated it a 7/7" does not meet the "objective, data-driven" criteria.
-
No, I really don't because its not relevant based on what I've already said.
-
Sorry for double post, but I needed get out that little scream before I could think.
Now, it should be noted that the majority, if not all, of mate-rating behavior is completely within the bounds of the rules. People's intentions can not moderated, even when those intentions are clear. If I see the new work of photographer whom I admire and give those pieces 7/7s because I absolutely adore them, then they go to my portfolio, LOVE my work (we're dealing in hypotheticals, remember) and rate mine highly - is that mate-rating? Is it against the rules to rate another photographer highly consistently if you believe their work is truly superior? How would Brian go about seeing into someone's head to find out their intentions? Or should he just pour over hours and hours and hours of data about who rated who how and when to try and give it a guess?
So what rule are the mate-raters breaking in a blatant enough way to warrant action? They are annoying. They are shameless. They aren't doing anything to warrant persecution.
And so what if people continue to mate-rate? It's human nature. The fact that mate-rating no longer gives the culprits top billing (in turn lowering the exposure of others' photos) means that something has been improved.
And will continue to be improved.
-
Vincent, do know how aggrivating it is to explain to someone that the system is scheduled to be tweaked and then have then bombard you with regurgitated complains about the need to change something that you JUST SAID would be changed? ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRG! Please READ what I actually SAID!
-
Vincent, it is that way because 10 ratings of any kind knock a photo out of the RFC, so the good photogs with lots of people watching them fill their quota up quickly with fans (not necessarily mate-raters) and then no longer receive RFC ratings. Brian has said that he was correct that problem once people get adjusted to the new system as whole. I think that will clear things up nicely.
As it is, it gives more exposure to new or unknown members and less to people already embedded in the community. A bit socialist, but whatever. That said, it will be readjusted once everyone gets over the apparent trama of the initial change, as per an earlier thread on this forum. Baby steps.
As for Hanna, well, the last time I saw someone so argumentative as to blast someone for their spelling was back when I hung out at a web design forum for teenagers. Come to think of it, the last time I saw someone follow a person around pulling hair and calling ridiculous names (as she does to Chris) it was a case of grade school love. Better check your cubby for love notes, Chris, I think you have a secret admirer!
And no, I will not check my spelling because people understand what I am saying and I rather spend time taking/printing/viewing/discussing photographs, so excuse any typos, sentence structure errors, or misuse of commas. This may cause the fall of photography as we know it, but I am willing to take that chance.
-
LOL. Thanks Barry, that's very ... bizarre. :-D
-
I just uploaded a new photo and submitted it for critique. As I
always do, I then headed over to the Critique Forum to dispense with
a little commenting and rating.
Then I realized that when I rate and comment, usually 10% of those
people come to comment on or rate one of my photos. Well, if I do
that now, my ratings quota will fill up and the RFC will be pretty
much useless to me. I know that my photos aren't making TRP anytime
soon, but they have enough troubles on their own, they don't need me
creating new ones for them.
So the system discourages people from commenting and rating now,
especially those people who have a chance at regularly appearing on
the TRP page.
Is my logic faulty somewhere in here?
-
-
Exactly what I was thinking. Where do you run into the problem. Will PS CS not allow you to save it or do you get an error message when you are trying to upload the Photo.net? If you receive an error, what does the error look like and at what point down it come up. Please let us know at what point in the process you are running into trouble.
-
Jan,
I'd like to add to the suggestions above that if you are not logged in, you will only see the bio information, not the gallery, forum postings, ect. Sounds to me like you may have not been logged in the first time.
-
Getting back to the heart of the question:
Sorted by date of last contribution
? Christopher Appoldt - Anyone who can laugh at themselves AND take a pretty good photo or two is worth admiration.
? Lisa Grant - Style, style, style. Everything she touches comes away dripping with style.
? Beau * - Wow. What Leica photography is all about.
? Tim Holte - His biography sums up why I take pictures, and his portfolio echos is 558 times over.
? Doug Burgess - I have to like him, he?s my neighbor.
? Terry Ward - It takes the mental capacity and motor skills of a four year-old to use a holga to make kind of cool, puedo-artsy pictures. It takes a genius to use one like he does. He is my toy camera inspiration.
I guess my picks are a bit odd, but I guess I'm looking for something a little different here.
-
I second that request. I mean, most of the time I feel like looking at, let's say, street photography, but it would be nice to be able to hop on and see the <i>best</i> [insert disclaimer here about ratings mean nothing blah blah blah] street photography. RFCs are already arranged by catagory, how hard could it be to filter those by rating? (yeah, I know, the answer is probably <i>very</i>.)
-
That given a relatively level playing field, the mate raters would end up on the last few pages of the TRP search.
-
I have to say, I got a mighty big, petty chuckle out of hitting "previous" on the TRP page and a notorious mate rater who always has one, two, or three photos on the front page, with several pictures on the last page, and to be honest, they the images looked perfectly in context with the others.
-
<i>While I'm on the category subject, it would also be nice to be able to specify a category in "Rate Recent". I believe that would help do away with low ratings simply because an individual doesn't like a certain genre of images.</i>
<br><br>
If you rate images through the critique forum catagory view (such as the example below) does it count as a "rate recent" rating?
<br><br>
<a href="http://www.photo.net/gallery/photocritique/?rating_type=photocritique&topic_id=1481&category=Abstract" target="_blank">http://www.photo.net/gallery/photocritique/?rating_type=photocritique&topic_id=1481&category=Abstract</a>
<br><br>
You cannot view the top rated images by catagory (the first part of your question) but people are already free to view only images in catagories they perfer.
Pentax *istDS is it a dull pallete vs D70?
in Pentax
Posted
When shooting in jpg mode, the DS' Vivid Mode will give brighter, more saturated, and more sharpened pictures. Vivid Mode is built into the DS' preset modes, such as the portrait mode and moving object mode. I personally prefer the Natural Mode for more neutral pictures.
When shooting in RAW mode and processing with Photoshop CS, Photoshop automatically corrects color, temperture, contrast, and brightness, and exposure. This auto correction is a good starting point and can easily be tweaked in the Adobe Camera Raw plug-in. This is a free plug-in that can be downloaded from adobe.com. The DS' is not listed as a supported camera, but it is supported. It may be worth it to look at upgrading to CS2, as it provides much more seamless, integrated support.