minicucci

<p>While this post is likely obsolete, I did want to add one suggestion. When you are stuck with a blown-out, featureless sky, you can often use a modest gradient fill, using plausible sky colors and adjusting the gradient to variations in luminance. </p><div></div>

<div></div>

I think it means that the internal lithium battery needs replacement. At least, that's what it

used to mean.

While I certainly agree with Walter, I think what's happened here is a misread of the stats.

Steve, your rating stats say that you've rated 3 images at a rating of 3 for Originality and that

you've rated 1 photograph at a rating of 3 for Aesthetics. All of your other ratings are above

3 (both O & A). Based on your comment, that's probably correct.

James: it is probably an uninstall issue (although there have been some file corruption

issues with PSD files exported from Lightroom. Below is some text from the Adobe support

boards for proper steps to uninstall:

 

"But for those who have installed it and want to uninstall it, the steps are pretty

straigthforward:

1) Uninstall using the uninstaller on Mac and Add/Remove Programs on Windows

2) Select to remove all the components

3) Uninstall

4) Manually remove the Adobe Bridge CS3 folder

5) Also, see the FAQ note #1443660 about the photoshop-9.jsx file

 

#1443660: Mac/Win: Uninstalling CS3 removes the photoshop-9.jsx file and breaks CS2

Photoshop/Bridge interactions

------------------------------------------------------------

Workaround:

a) Re-install CS2

or

b) Recover the photoshop-9.jsx file from a previous backup and place

here:

Mac: /Library/Application Support/Adobe/StartupScripts

Win: \Program Files\Common Files\Adobe\StartupScripts"

 

If that does not cure, I suggest posting the issue on CS3 Bridge support board:

http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/webforums/forum/categories.cfm?

forumid=72&catid=627&entercat=y

Yep. That was it. Mark, you are my hero!

I use Spell Catcher and that had curly quotes checked. Let's see if turning it off changes

anything.

Thanks Mark. Unfortunately, I do not use any middle program. I am just typing into the

critique box for comments. Safari offers nothing in preferences to turn off curly quotes but

Iլl have to check some of my other utilities to see if they are the culprit. Thanks for the lead!

I seem to have a problem getting apostrophes to render correctly. What I see are question marks replacing

the apostrophe.

 

I generally use Safari as a browser but the issue remains the same if I open the page in FireFox. Changing

text encoding to any of the usual suspects does nothing to cure the problem.

 

If it is just me, obviously you should ignore, although any suggestions on how to fix on my end would be

appreciated.

Leo:

 

Preferences are under the Edit menu.

 

(http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bbfb741/0)

It is somewhere in the menu. Try looking under file. Windows might call it properties.

Edward? Can you help?

Leo:

 

Go into Bridge's preferences, select "File Type Associations" and click on the button to restore

defaults. Edward's guidance may also be a another way to do it...but I'm a Mac user.

Edward: I agree with Walter's comments and would add that Margulis has a newer book out

that deals specifically with the LAB colorspace (Photoshop LAB Color).

 

Personally, for me the charm of LAB is the complete separation of luminosity/contrast from

color which cannot be replicated in RGB. That allows for some mighty powerful editing/

retouching but not without the cost of subjecting an image to a round trip of color mode

changes. Worth it if you need it but not an automatic, especially for a well shot image.

Brian: Perhaps you'd be willing to consider some middle ground? Why not allow a link to

the Critique Only submissions...for now...with the up-front notice that the CO forum, as

we have known it, will deactivate upon release of the critique circles that you discuss

above. (Which I find a very intriguing idea with a lot of potential.)

 

Done in that context, your goals and strategy are intact and the CO group has due notice

of changes coming. Howard's point about changes in strategy often means changes in the

customer base is correct. I'd argue, though, that most of the vehement CO community are

good citizens making a substantial contribution to the site through prolific critiques

(valued by members) and are worth keeping around if not all together happy.

 

As I think Jayme mentioned, I've never read any ratings diatribes by the more prominent

CO users. I have read them from participants in the rating system who became angered or

embittered by the rates given to their photos. These folks rarely last long in the CO

community because their interest is in the competiton versus meaningful feedback.

 

After looking at the profiles of a handful (5) of the more committed CO users, a minimum

of 66% of their last 100 critiques went to images submitted to the rating system, versus

the CO forum. That translates to thousands to mostly meaty comments to the membership

at large. It is worth something.

 

I'd also like to acknowledge one real positive of the new system that I have not seen

mentioned before in context of CO. The new list of thumbs that show when clicking

Critique Forum expands the visibility of CO submissions considerably. Before the changes,

images tagged for CO went by in the nano second of the limited CF page. Now there is

some staying power, especially in the categories. That's a good thing!

 

In any event, Brian, please consider a little bit of transition accommodation.

The major problem with using any upsampling or downsampling in a printer driver is your

output sharpening will either be rendered moot or will introduce artifacts. Output sharpening

should be down on the final size of the image going to print. For that reason, I'd stick with PS

sampling versus any of the printer drivers.

Hi Will: Your idea about setting up a blank canvas is the right one. What probably

happened was a resolution mismatch. I'd bet dollars to donuts that the canvas document

was set to 72 PPI and your images were at 300-360 or so. Just make sure all images and

the target canvas are the same resolution and it should work fine.

 

Alternatively, you can cut the 13 x 19 down into smaller sheets and print regularly.

 

Paper trimmers range in quality. You can pickup semi-decent, small trimmers at Staples

that will cost around $30-$40 if use is going to be intermittent and for paper (not mat)

only. Carl (brand name) makes an OK cutter in this price range. The king of hill for

trimmers is the Rotatrim and they are very pricy but worth every penny IMO. I have a 30

inch Rotatrim that I bought used and consider it one of my finer purchases. They run

around $500 new for that size.

Jeremy:

 

here 'tis:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/pc-recent-requests?topic_id=1481&critique_p=1

I think Carl Root's last comment pretty much nails it. People like the PS-on-steroids

images, in part because a large share of the rating audience struggle mightily with that

very program. They are looking at stuff that they know they cannot do themselves (not for

lack of trying) and they pay homage to it in the ratings. (Well, that and the fact that

Thomas Kincaid sells a whale of a lot "paintings".) It's natural to over-compensate for skills

you know you do not possess. Perhaps the trends will change as more people acquire

better editing skills.

 

Classic photography still gets its due but only if it is very very good. Medium quality stuff

gets kicked to the side pretty quickly. It certainly does not help that some/many of the

strongest, classical photographers do not participate much in the ratings game. The field

largely has been left to those who commit drive-by rating through inexperience more than

anything else.

 

Will, having made one (count 'em....one) composite in my time here, you might consider

adding the word "Composite" to the image's title, in parentheses. That way, no one is at

any risk of being mistaken about the image's genesis. I also add a thumb of the original

raw shot so that disclosure on post processing is complete.

Julien: There are no profiles for the 2400 yet. Colorbyte has had quality problems with

getting the 2400 profiles. They (Colorbyte) say that the new driver and profiles should be out

shortly...but they have been saying that for awhile now.

Arnulf: You might take a look at this thread:

http://www.photo.net/photo/4314774

sRGB tightly compresses transitions from one color to another, which can lead to a range of

issues when your editing space is a larger gamut that sRGB (and everything has a larger

gamut than sRGB).

 

Stripping data and then converting is no solution, unless I misunderstand you question. To

do so, you'd have to resave a JPG, which would introduce a host of other quality questions

quite apart from color and all in trade for no benefit that I know of.

If you click on the first entry (a TIFF file), just before the Oops posting, the image is full size.

If that does not work, let me know and I'll email it. This is Save For the Web, powered by PS'

ImageReady application. Not sure if it is the same for WIndows. The menu I was showing

Arnulf is displayed when you click on the little triangle at the upper right of the image

window. Again, it might look different in Windows.

 

The preset just says "Unnamed" because I've been too lazy to name it. I always use the same

settings.

Oops. Here's the JPG.<div></div>

Arnulf:

 

One thing you can try is to setup PSCS' Save-For-The-Web to display the JPG using "Standard

Windows Color". In theory, this will alert you to any problems before you post. Just click on

the little triangle in the upper right corner as shown in the attached and select the Windows

option.

 

I also agree that it is best to calibrate your monitor to a 2.2 gamma versus the traditional 1.8

gamma of the Mac. It is a 2.2 gamma world out there.

The easiest solution on the Mac is to setup custom pages for your printer with equal margins

on all sides of the paper. When done that way, the centering check in PS Print Preview works

perfectly.

K; The reason it is not working on your iBook is because Apple appropriated the Cmd-

Option-Tilde for one of their own commands. All you have to do is open System Preferences/

Keyboard & Mouse. Go to the Keyboard Shortcuts tab and uncheck the shortcut for "Move

Focus To The Window Drawer", (which is the shortcut that claimed that command). Once

unchecked, that key combination will work normally in PS.