kiro

hanna - it looks like a norse or swedish type of language to me

 

Josh - this gives me an idea of a great service that pnet could provide: a directory of

infringing sites. it could be a system where say you know that pic.playcomet.com is

infringing, and then us photographers could each put in the URLs where our copyrights are

being infringed, then the database could be made readily accessible by google, godaddy, etc,

so that they can be mindful of who's naughty. feel free to email me outside the thread if you

want an expanded idea of what i'm talking about.

Taking advantage of the no login requirement on the comments, I posted the following

comment below my photo:

<br><br>

<i>PlayComet.com are thieves!

<br><br>

pic.playcomet.com is illegally infringing on photographers' copyrights. I am the

photographer who took this photo and I have NEVER authorized them to use this photo. If

you would like to see this photo and others I've taken on my website where of course they

were intended to be seen, go to: http://www.kierselinsky.com

<br><br>

To read more about other photographers that are having their copyrights infringed by

PlayComet.com, go to: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?

msg_id=00OLRb</i>

damn... found one of mine... i've filed my grievances - I'd also make a suggestion - when you

file with google and godaddy, give them the link back to this thread as well, so that they can

see that you're not alone.

unless you give up your copyright in writing, you the photographer retains copyright,

otherwise you're just allowing a usage. the publisher retains copyright over the book as a

product though. depending on the wording of the contract, you may have to grant

exclusivity of the usage for a period of time. basically, unless they are giving you lotsa

money, don't hand over that copyright

expose so that the furnace "looks right", set your flash for a stop or two below that and

bounce/diffuse it so that it's not obviously flash in the results

you can also try openoffice.org - a free office alternative

just post a thread asking "any photographers in [your area]?"

don't be afraid to use manual mode. when using strobes, the flash duration is faster than

your shutter speed, so shutter doesn't matter - just set it to 1/200. pick an aperture based

on desired depth of field, and adjust strobes so that you get the exposure you want. when

you're in portrait mode, the camera is trying to make these decisions for you, but it's doing

so without the info it needs (flash strength). i'd recommend heading down to the library and

pick up a book on studio photography to get you jumped ahead

are you in manual mode or one of the auto modes? (tip: you'll want to be in manual) don't

use auto white balance. check your histo after each shot; are you sure both strobes are firing

on each shot? those are good starting points

thanks karen!

Hi Everyone,<br>

I recently completed an overhaul on my website and am looking for some feedback. It doesn't matter to

me if you know what it looked like before or not... whattaya think of this one?<br>

<a href="http://www.kierselinsky.com/" target="_blank">http://www.kierselinsky.com</a><br><br>

Thanks for any and all feedback!

ok, that cut off the link, it's <a href="http://www.aftercapture.com/print-

archives/1148/web-insight-search-engine-optimization" target="_blank">here</a>

The design and flow is fine, but you should avoid using frames if at all possible. You do

have one outstanding problem though - I would be surprised if, no matter what you did,

Google ranked you in the first 100 pages of results in a search for NY/NJ photographers.

The only search you might end up near the top in is if someone searches you by name.

The reason for this is that there is only one page with any level of substantial text. If you

want to get good SEO (Search Engine Optimization), you need to have visible text on every

page of the site which is "keyword loaded" - text that is written so that people will want to

read it, but still has all the keywords that you want people to google you by. There was

actually a halfway decent writeup in after capture magazine this month here:

http://www.aftercapture.com/print-archives/1148/web-insight-search-engine-

optimization

<i>Btw, how do I check on the address on the regional post office? Does anyone have

experience in filing police report from out of state? He lives in TX and I live in

NJ.</i><br><br>

did you mail a money order? or did you wire him money (e.g. western union)? if you sent it

by mail, it's mail fraud, contact the postmaster general's office - last i heard, they have the

highest conviction rate of any law enforcement arm. outside of that i'm not positive - since

it's interstate, can you use the fbi?

<i>if you made it so that the ads were for paid up members only, and had a billing system

that ONLY accepted credit/bank cards and required input of card billing

address...</i><br><br>

having been involved in the building and maintenance of online communities, I have to say

that I think Josh is doing the right thing here. There are legal reckonings, especially

internationally. If you imply that you are doing something to stop scammers, there are

plenty of lawyers out there that will turn that around into a negligence suit against pnet. If

you take the something awful route, as noted above, that may work, if you're willing to pay

for it. It all comes down to what your risks are, and how much you're willing to lay out in a

legal defense. The route pnet takes right now is the most easily defensible position, and

something awful's is defensible, but would cost more. I am not a lawyer, but this is the

advice I've gotten from several on the subject.

i would get a calibration kit (e.g. the huey you mention). even though i don't do my own

printing, i instruct my print house not to modify color or tone correctness, and the results

come back exactly as what i have on screen. once you get it set right, it's been my

experience that it's 100% reliable

Ellis - got a preferred link?

sharpening should always be your last step, and actually, what i do is when i'm going to make a print, i size it, then sharpen. once you sharpen, it's hard to resize for a print size without it getting noisy. so save a master without sharpening, and just sharpen before output. same goes for tiff vs jpg - always save in the lossless (tiff) format, then output to jpg later if needed (however, most decent print houses these days have no problem handling a tiff, so the only reason to go to jpg is to save upload time). color space, in my view, is debatable, and should really be determined by your final output. call whomever handles your printing and ask if they can handle adobe RGB - it's my understanding (unless i've been misinformed), that most printers output is closer to sRGB than Adobe RGB, and so it's best to work in sRGB so that you are making the color decisions instead of a machine.

looks like a single softbox on camera right, probably a medium one set five or six feet away, possibly a grid on it, but not sure. seeing as how it's a pnet photo, why not contact them directly?

Hey folks - so if you're like me, you've at one time or another had an old

digital P&S sitting around. I had one such P&S, a 5MP nikon that, when I

checked eBay, looked like it would gather about $20. I have a son who is now 5,

but when I did this, he was about 2 1/2 yrs old. So I said what the hell, and

handed him the camera to see what he could do with it. After about 50 shots of

the backs of me and my wife's knees, and the dogs' butts, he started picking up

on the idea of pointing the camera upwards some. Then he started arranging toys

into scenes and stuff and made some cool pics... because of the instant

gratification of the digital lcd on the back, they learn fast. the point is, if

santa brought you a new P&S, and you're wondering about what to do with the old

one that's not worth the trouble to ebay, hand it down to a little kid. it's a

pretty cool experiment, and has provided some pretty cool perspective on the way

he thinks when mom and dad are not around. or, hell, ship it to me - after two

years of getting banged into everything in the house, the camera finally died

(those little buggers are tougher than you'd expect!) and it's time to get my

son a new one from ebay. in my view, the roughly 1000 photos that he took with

it are worth the $20 that i didn't get on ebay, especially since they are the

bulk of the rare photos of me (the curse of being the photographer).

 

happy new year!

the "expose to the right" info is dead on above. there are some subjects where following this technique will freak you out some because it looks like you're not getting the info you need. but trust it, and learn to use a curves adjustment layer, and your shots will be as noiseless as possible. it works very well, the article at luminous landscape noted above was a real eye opener for me as well. the following photo, when viewed in camera, looked almost completely light-blue, until i curved it:<br>

<img src="http://www.kierselinsky.com/images/clouds/clouds_5.jpg" border="0"><br>

<a href="http://www.kierselinsky.com/displayimage2.asp?Gallery=clouds&image=56" target="_blank">Clouds #5</a>

looking good... although, i still suggest that you do a custom white balance, because it looks like the ice is a bit yellow and could be whiter with a better wb

from a series i did<div></div>

when i did my research, nothing seemed to come close to photoshelter.com for features

in theory, they should all produce the same results with the same exposure and scene. so if your gossen says iso 100, f4, 1/125, and you shoot the same subject with all cams at all same settings, you should, in theory, get the same results. however, there can be minor variances in films, as well as variances in what the true f-stop is of the lens, and the true shutter speed of the camera (e.g. if one of the older cams is out of caliber). also, perhaps most importantly, a digi is like slide film, so the clipping will be opposite of the film format. but, again, all else being equal, if you shoot slide film along side a digi, the results should be the same. of course, if you want to figure out the exact calibration between the two, this is what roughly 25% of ansel adams book "the negative" is about