ricardo_tomasi

<p>I think I've read this at pentaxforums sometime last year.</p>

<p>"after epoch" sounds like a very old expression. Epoch can be used as a synonym of "era", it's probably more frequent in british english, and much used in languages that originate from latin like french or portuguese.</p>

<p>As another fan of yours Ben, I'm sorry to agree. It's a great shot except for the gum, the lighting doesn't look right. White is too light, and the shadow from her arm is too dark and cuts off suddenly near the bottom. It's also projecting an unrealistic shadow contour in the bottom left. Nathan sounds right about the light source.</p>

<p>#2 looks great, classic old slide look. If you decide to dispose of those rolls I'd be happy to pay for shipping :D<br>

Are you sure the lab is not applying automatic correction to the scans? That would explain the blown highlights and inconsistent color balance. If it looks alright in the slide, it should look the same on the scan, there's no magic in light, and a scanner should have enough dynamic range to deal with slides without a hitch.</p>

Except for the creamy bokeh in the first shot, what is in these pictures that depends on the camera? You can get shots like these with any equipment, the difference is in lighting and processing.

I don't have anything to back me up, but I remember reading/being told somewhere that it behaves like that for "safety" reasons - the metering for manual/FF lenses is not very accurate and things get worse for very long exposures, so the camera just doesn't try to guess.

I can see some color in parts of his face. Why don't you do a real B&W conversion, like, without colors? :)

 

The lighting is a bit dull, play with levels/contrast and see if you can get a more pleasing image, try B&W conversions from single color channels (R,G,B) and combinations of.

seems to be happening in deep blacks. There is a feature in photoshop to turn everything that's black into 100 K (instead of a brownish mixture of all cmyk colours), maybe that would help. It could be exageratting artifacts already present in the image too.

Death to Comic Sans. Great pictures :)

I have another minor annoyance. The "Forums" drop-down menu is extending beyond the bottom end of the screen (1024x768 resolution), so I can't access the "Portraits & Fashion" forum, for example. Maybe it should be sized in percentage to the screen, not in pixels, or maybe we need less forums :D

Any chance of implementing something like (or portions of) <a href="http://tinymce.moxiecode.com/">TinyMCE</a>, <a href="http://www.kevinroth.com/rte/">RTE</a> or the <a href="http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/editor/">YUI Editor</a>? I'd volunteer for free contribution :)

I agree with Peter. Check my post on this thread: <a

href="http://www.photo.net/site-feedback-forum/00Q6mS">http://www.photo.net/site-feedback-forum/00Q6mS</a> (closed down

don't know why, would like some feedback).

<br /><br />

One thing that bugs me is that the typeface changed for the forum listings, but in the message body it's still

the old one, seems a bit "decoupled".

<p>I'm not very fond of the new individual forum pages. It looks way more cluttered than the old style, too close to the left edge of the page, and the bold font makes it harder to scan through the thread titles.</p>

 

<p>I took the liberty to sketch a cleaner layout (in my opinion):<br />

<img src="http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii45/ricardobeat/pforum-1.png" border="0" alt="Photobucket" /></p>

 

<small>On a technical sidenote, why is your developer using a .gif for the list bullet when all modern browsers provide it via CSS?</small>

I bet you had exposure bracketing on by accident, I've done that. It doesn't turn itself off automatically but starts from 0 when you restart the camera.

Oh god, next they'll make it an HDR shot.

 

Phil Winter's version looks as good as it could get, and I don't think the original shot looks bad. I like color

casts, specially that warm incandescent look that comes with uncomplete WB correction. You see the scene in

yellowish colors, why should the picture be white?

As strange as it sounds, rinsing electronics with water is a good measure if it has been submerged into any

impure liquid, and you don't have gallons of isopropyl alcohol hanging around. I've washed my MP3 player

successfully after it was left a full day sitting on spilled coke, and I've heard stories of digital P&S

recovered after a machine wash. My own GX-10 is fully functional after bein ran over by a car, so I believe this

stuff :D Just make sure it's all thoroughly dry before turning it back on.

Hmm. What countries exactly are you referring to?

I don't have any experience with that, but common sense has a few answers for you:

 

1. work is never "easy" to find

 

2. there is demand for good photography everywere

 

3. just think. do you have money to hire a make-up artist and buy the model clothes?

 

4. both cameras you mentioned are more than adequate for the job. you and your technique is what matters most.

The slideshow is the only option. People can choose how to view your images, that's the point. If you want to force a black background, try pbase.com or smugmug.com.

If the pictures are ok after uploading it's obvious it's an issue with the printing process, you're probably uploading non-standard size pictures - big print resellers don't check images before printing. Check the pizel size and resolution (DPI) required for each print size on the website and adjust your files accordingly.

I believe te Powershot G7 is one of the fastest.

You will be certainly getting images with downgraded quality. High quality front-surface mirrors are very expensive, you'll get some ghosting with a normal mirror. Are you sure you need it? That tube in front of your camera is going to attract more attention than if you were just taking shots directly. There's nothing to worry if you're not doing anything wrong.

"Normal persons" would only (if) notice the focus a bit off, the rest are just details. On a closer look the one thing I don't like is the soft glow effect. It's fine for some pictures, but in every one of them it's a bit annoying, and the lack of skin blemish softening vs the glow makes it look weird. Her skin has a compressed JPG texture, mostly in the face.

 

Despite that and agreeing with the last 3 comments, those are very good pictures, congrats.

uh? printed?

 

you mean compared prints to screen output, as in calibration?

The best school is practice, go fill up your Flickr account. Some vehicles called "buses" might help with the first issue, unless you are shooting large format!