Dustin McAmera

A brighter image is easier to see. Stopping down also gives you depth of field, which means you won't be able to see the exact point of correct focus so precisely when stopped down. I think it's lack of depth-of-field in a very wide-aperture lens that would give it an advantage for precise focusing. That's human focusing covered. Does the same reasoning mean auto-focus systems need to be at full aperture? I think so: it still makes sense that differences in focus will be more easily detected in a brighter image. And depth of field will increase 'micro-contrast' in slightly out-of-focus areas; the measure used in that system of AF reflects what we see.

I have been looking at the old forum posts. The ability to find old discussions of an obscure camera is one of the things I value most about photo.net. I've even cited forum posts here in wiki pages at camera-wiki. Old forum posts can now be browsed a long way back: For example, the Medium Format forum runs to 1600 pages of 25 threads each, and the earliest post is from March 1997. I find I can embed it by pasting the url here! (Aside: Curiously, the title of that post is 'Follow up re: ...' so it's not the earliest post about MF on photo.net; refers to an earlier post on a thing called MFD (maybe Medium Format Discussions?) Vol 7 #1 - maybe an earlier thread-format that couldn't be rescued when the rejigged the structure sometime around '93? La plus ça change... Also curiously, while was reading that post, a notification appeared at the bottom, of four new replies to it! There weren't really; the existing replies just registered as new, I guess.) Anyhow, you can browse that far back, but search seems to go back exactly two years at the moment. I'm confident this is a setting that can be re-set to search all time. I hope so. For example if I search for 'Ikon' (as in Zeiss Ikon) with the scope set to 'Topics' at the right of the search box, I get nine pages of results, and the earliest one is in October 2020. But if I search for 'Agifold' I get no results at all. There are posts on that camera - I posted some of them myself - but they're more than two years old. Thanks again to the people doing the migration!

What I described are not filters: just a different view with its own url. Get to a view you like and bookmark it. My bookmark is the Unread Content view.

You'd notice focus breathing the first time you use a view camera (one with a full-size ground-glass screen at the back). I haven't done anything close up yet, but I have sometimes been surprised, as I focused, that something I thought was in the view crept off the edge of the screen.

Anhow, that's the 'All activity' view: not surprisingly, it shows all activity. But you can click 'Unread content' in the top-right of the page, and not see any of the reactions - just actual posts. Or you can click Forums, and then navigate to one forum to see only the posts in that one.

So it would seem; maybe everone's buried in a book (if they're not clicking exciting links to Indian online pharmacies...) Another of my favourites is Fay Godwin's Land; just bright B&W British landscapes. This is from the 1980s I think: I was given it by my parents. She got a big grant from the UK Arts Council to do landscape photography - so a bit like Renger-Patsch, only different: different landscapes and a very different style. MF too, where Renger-Patsch in 1930 must have been using (orthochromatic) 9x12cm I guess. This is turning into memory lane. I bought Marketa Luskacova's Pilgrims while I was a student in London. It's the catalogue of an exhibition at the Victoria & Albert Museum - this fact is dear to me, because the V&A was close to my college, and I would sometimes bunk off a lecture to go in. These are B&W 35mm photographs of Slovak pilgrims, some going back to the 1960s. A selection is presented on her website: http://www.marketaluskacova.com/subjects I confess I know Friedlander mostly as a name in my generalist photograph books. His breadth is impressive isn't it? I guess that's a long career. I will add him to m homework list.

I only have Elements, not the full Photoshop. In the Preferences, there's a section called Performance, and in that section it should show you what RAM memory is available in the computer, and how much Photoshop is allowed to use. Maybe you're just reaching that limit, and you could increase the limit. This is for a recent (2022) version of Elements. It may look different if you have an older version.

Welcome! I'm no expert on this stuff, but a couple of thoughts. How many files have you got open in Photoshop? If it's more than one, try opening one at a time: each one occupies some memory. Similarly, if you have other applications running at the same time, try closing them while you do Photoshop. It may help other people to comment if you say what version of Photoshop you have, what operating system, what file format you are starting with, and what format you're trying to Save as. Good luck!

I seem to be one of the less angry members. The new board was going to be different from the old one. Programming used to be part of my job, and I know it takes time to get things working. The alternative, of shutting the whole thing down for a fortnight while they made the change, would have been worse. These are my thoughts so far; sorry to be long-winded. Paid Pro/Free memberships: I have never paid to be here. My only contribution here is my knowledge of a few things, and one or two bad jokes, and good behaviour, mostly. It seems that Pro members have had less rights than us freeloaders in the first couple of days. If this is simply a matter of group rights being set wrong (maybe the wrong way round - am I due a rude awakening?) it should be easily fixed by the board admins once they have the whole thing basically working. It seems that people who pay to be here ought to get something more in return. I don't see a way to switch to a paid membership at present; I would be prepared to switch if the extra service is good enough, and if I can be confident that I can stop paying later if I choose. I seem to remember there being a lot of complaints on the old board about automatic renewals happening whether you liked it or not. Galleries/portfolios: I'm not too worried about portfolios. I don't keep my pictures here. It seems that quite a few members were complaining that they couldn't access their portfolios, though the front page had a big panel saying 'Galleries are down'. Ranks: I can't even remember whether the old board gave us ranks. In principle, they can help you to assess another member who you don't know (and how likely it is that they know what they're talking about). I'm not sure I would have so many ranks, and I would probably name them differently. I think if you can see the raw stats of how many posts someone has made, and how long the've been here, you can size them up pretty well. I see ranks have disappeared at the time I write this. It will be interesting to see if they come back and if the have changed. Some members have been complaining about starting from 'Newbie', but I think it's daft to take that personally. This is a software thing; the computer is not trying to diss you. Badges: I suppose badges are supposed to act as a reward for productive behaviour; the system notices if you are posting, commenting, and staying here. We haven't had them before, and I don't think I would have asked for them if the hadn't been there; but I guess the new board software allows them, so why not. I seem to have got nine of them within a couple of days. I couldn't find a guide to what more badges there might be. I've been reporting a few spammers, but my 'Snitch' badge seems to be lost in the mail. I guess it might be nice to adjust the long-service badges to reflect people's time in the old board: we have some twenty-year people. You'd get a tie-pin for that in some places! Overall, photo.net has had a rather austere style for a long time. That suits the sort of people who do old-school photography (with cameras), and certainly the ones who deliberately seek out old cameras to do it with. It suited me. But the old board was not going to be sustainable. The new board software is what allows the new owners to offer the thing to us at all. I like this place being here, and if someone else is going to negotiate the minefield of keeping the board available, with all its years of old wisdom, I'll take that deal, with Ranks and Badges, and Smiley-faced Likes. I quite like the Unread Content view. The All Activity view is hard to go away from. Thanks to the people doing the work, and the mods here!

My favourite for now is Albert Renger-Patsch - die Ruhrgebietsfotografien, the catalogue of an exhibition at the Ruhr Museum I think. Anyhow it's from 2018, Verlag der Buchhandlung Walther König, ISBN 978-3-96098-452-8. I had for ages known his name, having touched on that period of German photography several times, but I only knew a few of his pictures, from books that included many photographers. His photos have something in common with the Bechers; huge industrial architecture, so the photos seem to ignore the people who live amongst it. Where they are present, they're usually tiny and sometimes a little blurred. He was an architectural photographer, I believe, and was hired by the regional government to document their landscape, which had changed with industrial development, and was going to change again. I'm sure they knew that what would emerge would have artistic merit, not just as a historical document. I wonder if they knew their area was likely to be bombed to crap: I have google-street-viewed a few of the locations, and none of it is easily recognised. Coincidentally, my sister gave me the graphic novel Berlin, by Jason Lutes ISBN 978-1-77046-326-4, so I was well stocked with neue Sachlichkeit during the pandemic.

Actually, on this page, it seems that everyone who is labelled Member can see the names, and everone labelled as a Pro can't, not counting Sandy Vongries who didn't say. So maybe it is simply a group-rights thing. If so it will be easy to fix, when they get round to it.

That was me 🙂

I see the names, and I'm a registered freeloader, not a paid-up member. Earlier, people were mentioniing what OS and browser they were using; I think that may be the right area to look. FWIW I have Windows 11 and Firefox 105. I also have NoScript, and have marked photo.net and invisioncic.com as trusted. I also have AdBlock Plus, but it isn't blocking anything on this site. I tried putting invisioncic to default in NoScript (=not trusted; doesn't allow their script to run). I Exited Firefox, and then came back. I can still see the Like-names, but the photos themselves don't display. So I put invisioncic bac to trusted, and photo.net to default. Same effect: I see the names but not the photos. If you don't see the Like names, do you see the little bar of other reactions? When I mouse over the Like button, a bar of four other buttons (a 'Thanks' trophy, a laughing face, a confused face and a sad face) shoots out to the left of it.

I can see the names of Likers. We didn't have this spam problem before the change. I guess there was a spam-preventing measure in place that hasn't (yet) been replaced here. The forum-admins' forum at invision refer to three different ways: see https://invisioncommunity.com/search/?q="Forum spam"&quick=1&updated_after=any&sortby=relevancy&page=2 There seems to be (back in 2013) a Spam Service provided by Invision themselves. Then there is (or was, in 2013) a plugin available from Stop Forum Spam, which is (I think) a database of IP addresses which hae been reported as spammers. Any new registrant is checked against that. I know nothing about Spam Defense, but it seems it may be a replacement for the Spam Service. Anhow, it's above our powers; but there are anti-spam tools that can be used, and I guess in good time they will be. For now, I'm reporting the spam posts and files I see. There are also new registrants who are obviously here to spam (names like Online Pharmacy), but haven't yet posted. Maybe a profile page with their name on it is enough presence for them? I don't see a way to report these. FWIW, we had much more than this at camera-wiki; our spammers were obviously bots, making several new accounts per second at times. We are a low-budget operation, and in the end we had to disable self-registration.

I had to re-make my avatar. On my profile page, top-left, there was the big circle with a D for Dustin in it. Bottom-left of that is a little square which says 'Profile Photo' when you mouse over it. Click that, and it let me choose a photo to replace the circle-D. It even let me re-centre it afterwards.

What? No badges? But I'm Very Popular: it says so here, on my Very Popular badge. This has never happened before. From my cold dead hand you may take my badges!😠

🐶💩🤬

I think I remember that happening before the change; I was always careful to open threads in a new window, so as not to upset the 'Unread posts' window. Here, at the top-left of the Unread window, you should see 'Home >Activity >Unread content'. If you click on the word Activity, it shows you a list of all recent activity; it now includes entries for Likes, new members registering, etc. as well as forum posts.

Leeds Civic Hall on 'Light Night'. Canon A-1, FD85/1.8, HP5.

EOS M50 with the EF-M 22mm f/2.

Try just pasting the URL of the Flickr page: don't try to format it as a link. The editor will automatically embed it (it then offers to revert it to a text link). Can't see a way to control the size.. So here's Leeds Playhouse just about sunset:

I have always inserted Flickr photos with a link, but I used the Embed method in the Flickr 'share' dialog. Posts I made before the change have survived, but I just tried one here, and I just see the text of the jpg URL, not the picture. I'll see if I can find out how to do it...

It's here: https://www.flickr.com/help/guidelines