stoatsngroats

sorry about the caps above!

you may also have mirror lockup set in custom function 7 on the setup 2 menu.

hope this helps.

The eye means the red eye function is on...therefore the flash is waiting ti fire.

ADJUST THIS IN MENU 1 - RED EYE FUNCTION, SET TO OFF.

Thanks Bueh B, very informative. I'll try a poundsign £100...

hurrah!

Checkout my bird pictures - they're all taken on the Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 DG. Taken from about 12 feet away on a Canon 350D, and all manual focus. I'm no professional - this lens is all I can afford, but for the time being, it's a usable lens. For 120 GBP, its not bad value!

best regards,

Shaun dicker

Hi Daniel,

The 350D has mirror lock up, on a custom function. Please look at the 5 or so bird pictures in my portfolio - they are handheld, with manual focus, at 300mm, on a Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6, a lens which is considered at the cheaper end of the market.

My pictures are still trial and error, surely this is where digital wins over film (that old chestnut again!) You have the ability to snap away, changing the focus, for no cost!

If you're considering getting rid of the Canon, call me!

best regards,

shaun

Hi Juan, and others!

I'm new to PS Elements 5, highly recommend this for its capabilities, particularly for beginners!

I've got a couple of keyboard shortcuts which I use lots, shown below.

ctrl+alt+0 = view actual pixel size.

ctrl - = zoom out

ctrl + = zoom in

ctrl D = deselect mask.

hope this helps someone!

best regards to all who manage to not rate 3/3!

Shaun

Hi, I'm starting to use the above package, and had my first try at a composite

landscape/sky picture. The results are very compressed, but show a distinct

corner darkening on each right-hand upper corner, which doesn't stitch well.

Is the problem the exposure differences, or vignetting of the lens, (28-105, f4-

5.6), and should I have been able to have sorted this prior to the photomerge.

Thanks for your advice!

Shaun Dicker<div></div>

I've had some success with cheap lenses, +1, +1 and +4 together.

For small bucks, you get a chance to try...just move close to the subject, and focus by moving the camera. I use a 50mm 1.8II lens on my 350D.

Alan,

I'm sorry if you purchased those because of my comments, I thought you had a 50mm 1.8 lens!

Can you try those filters agin, standing about 5cm from your subject, and slowly backing up? I'm sure you could get at least SOME results from it, if its at 50mm?

I understand the comments above, but I tested my filters at the shop, and bought them on the strength of that test. They realy rsult in some good closeup, but not the quality of a true macro lens, which i cant afford. Horses for courses I suppose, eh?

Sorry for the trouble, if it was me!

Best regards,

shaun

Thanks for that Pico, I'm grateful to you, and yes, here it's a lorry. (I was trying to appeal to your americanisms!!).

I'm not capable of constructive philosphical discourse, but I hope that my posts can be taken, not as a reflection to me, as myself, but rather FROM my thoughts. I try to add to these threads of wisdom, but if my ( or anybody's) comments are not welcome, or rather, viewed as having no value, I can refrain from joining in.

Regarding 'strident' points, (yours, or anyone elses), I have the opportunity to disregard them, should I choose, but that then diminishes the value of what generally seems to be quality advice, or view.

I realise that your interests within this site, could be very different from mine, perhaps I'm here when I should be looking at DP magazine, et al. I may be mistaken when I think that I can learn something here, but thats why I'm here.

Are you able to offer your wisdom, and knowledge, to people like me? I accept that you may prefer to not commit to that side of the site, but, in my view, thats such a waste of talent.

Beat regards to you Pico,

Shaun

Pico,

When you write

"We rarely find here writings that concern the content, the subject or theme of photographs, the thing itself."

do you read any critiques? I do, and occasionally I find a 'nugget' of a comment which adds to the photograph. I also comment on some, as I go around looking at pictures.For what its worth, I drive a truck, full of milk, on a daily basis. This is the context in which I make my comments, not as a wise, knowledgable hack, who's seen it/done it all.

Your point...

"One goal of formal criticism is to attempt to place the thing, the work, the idea within its cultural, artistic context (domain) in order to appreciate it in a deeper manner."

....may apply to you, but for me, I'd like to share what other people feel about pictures. I subscribed, because when I read Philps 'about us' I liked the point about 'helping photographers to get better.'

Your line. "See my occasional, unfortunate rants for examples. :( " is not what I expected as a manner of learning. I dont want to read those kind is comments, as I find them containing no attempt at informative education.

I'd far rather have someone of your incredibly skills pass on some nuggets, by leaving comment, or, if you feel that I can coninue to live subsequently, some critique.

And, almost, finally, your post title; maybe it IS all about the photographer, when that photographer (applies loosly, in context to myself) has a desire to utilise this collective as a learning facility.

I need to post my pictures, and my comments, to gain knowledge, if only because I paid my bucks, and I'm entitled to it.

An, to end, this post is all about ME. I make no apologies for that, because you invited the comment.

Please, dont rant at me on this........one, nice wholesome, even friendly(!) retort from you out of three would be good.