missc

Hello,

 

Though I was a happy user of PN for a while, I haven't been using my account for years. There's nothing wrong, I'm simply elsewhere.

 

I have removed all my pictures. I would now like to close my account completely. I've searched to find out how to do this, it seems to be a mystery to many people.

 

Could someone please tell how to close my account? I could simply change my contact email address and never come back, but I find there should be a way to officially leave without seeking out and leaving a fake identity behind...

 

Thank you

<p>When I try to open most pages on PhotoNet, like if I click on the logo on the top left of this page, I get redirected to PriceGrabber website. :(</p>

<p>Thanks Fred, I'll do that now.</p>

<p>Hi Charles,<br>

I did that, but I still see the person's post under my photo, even when I don't sign into Photonet.<br>

Any other suggestions anyone?</p>

<p>Someone has posted an inappropriate critique under one of my images. The person simply posted a portrait of a woman and a name. Nothing to do with my actual image. How can I report this in hopes the critique can be deleted?</p>

<p>Hello all,<br>

I've just bought a Fugi X-E1 camera. At the store, I wanted to get a couple extra batteries (Fugi NP-W126), but they were out of stock. Went online, they are out of stock at b&H too. Chated with a costumer service rep. who suggested I get the <strong>Watson NP-W126</strong> battery instead.<br>

Anyone have any experience with this Watson immitation?<br>

I expect they would't be quite as good, but then they are half the price. Still, are they good enough I wonder??</p>

<p>Now that's more like it! Brilliant Rob! Many, many thanks! :) </p>

<p>Yes, I suppose that is the best way to go. At first glance, I'm just a tad dissapointed by the images I am finding there. But maybe it's just a question of taking the time to dig deeper in the site... Thank for the info guys!</p>

<p>Thanks Rob, I read through your linked page and found this :</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>NASA material is not protected by copyright unless noted. If copyrighted, permission should be obtained from the copyright owner prior to use. If not copyrighted, NASA material may be reproduced and distributed without further permission from NASA.</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>But how can I tell if an image found on the web, doing a Google image search, is from NASA or licenced by a private company?</p>

 

<p>Hello everyone,<br>

<br />I have a photo-manipulation project idea that involves replacing a ball in a child's arms by an photo of the Earth. I was wondering if space photos circulating on the web were public domain?<br>

I plan on exhibiting the final work in fine art galleries and eventually possibly selling prints and cards.<br>

Thanks in advance for any information you might have.</p>

 

<p>Thank you all for your generous insight. You've given me valuable hands-on advice. Now it's up to me to experiment with your recommendations and find the sweet combination of techniques that work best for me, knowing that capturing movement is impossible to nail every single time.<br>

A special thanks to WW for your curiosity & kind words. Do you have a personnal site? My favourite photo on your PN gallery: the image entitled Honey - Where did you Park the Twins? LOL! <br /><br /></p>

<p><strong>Thank you</strong> William for your very helpful & clear advice. From now on I'll definitely switch to AI Servo when shooting dance (which Scoot confirms) unless I can predict the coming movement, shoot loose when possible, use higher speeds for really fast movements and smaller apertures.<br>

I was trying to use lower ISO, but in the end you're all confirming I'm better off having to eliminating grain in pp than having to throw out nice but unsharp images...</p>

<p>Thanks Marcus. Working with a smaller f/stop makes perfect sense as a first step to sharper pictures, even if it means having to use higher ISO.<br>

But what about drive modes? Should I stick to the way I usually work, that is use One Shot mode, press & hold the shutter button half way to focus my subject with the center AF point, then quickly recompose the image? Or do you suggest I use one of the other drive modes with more AF points?</p>

<p>Hello everyone,<br /><br />I work with a Canon 50mm 1.2L lens mounted on a Canon 7D. For portraits sessions, I have no problem achieving good focus. But for dance, I am not achieving consistently sharp images. I would appreciate advice on the settings I should use for such situations.<br /><br />I have created an online gallery with a few images from my latest shoot (without post production): <a href="http://www.catherinerondeau.com/focus_problems/">http://www.catherinerondeau.com/focus_problems/</a><br /><br />As you can see, most of the faces of the dancers are not in focus (Images 1-2-3). I was shooting manual at ISO 500 to 800, 1/500 second, f1.2 to f1.6. For the drive mode, I kept switching from One Shot, to AI Focus, to AI Fervo, never achieving consistently sharp & well framed images. In the One Shot mode, my subject moved between the time I had focused on the face and reframed the entire body. In the other two drive modes, I could only achieve focus on the face if I placed the face in the center of the frame, cutting off parts of the lower body (Images 4-5). And even then, I wasn’t getting consistent sharp focus. I have always used only the center autofocus point (not the selective one). Should I be using another AF zone?<br /><br />Given the quality of my gear, I know the problem is coming from me.<br>

<br />Any suggestions for this type of situation? Thanks in advance!<br /><br /></p>

<p>Thank you for those additional comments guys. Bottom line : I will test for peace of mind but this effect is probably normal with this lens, aperture, conditions... So that's good news for me as I won't need to pay to get my lens cleaned! :)</p>

<p>I will do that testing Marcus. Thanks for the tip.<br>

Yes, I know how to correct in post, I was simply wondering why the vignetting was happening in the first place.<br>

Thank you all for taking the time to respond. You're such lovely bunch of people! Have a great day.</p>

<p>No hood. No filter.<br>

Oh! But now that I think of it, since it was snowing I had a special plastic cover on the camera with a drawstring for tightening around the lens. That must have created the hoodlike shadowing / vignetting? I think my mystery is solved!</p>

<p>Hello everyone,<br>

While looking over some pictures I recently took of my daughter on a snowy day, I was surprised to see a great deal of "vignetting" going on in my images. I will hereby be including an example photo as it came out of the camera (no post).<br>

I am using a fairly good quality lens (Canon EFS-17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM) mounted on a 7D. Is this normal? Does this mean my lens should be cleaned?<br>

Thanks in advance for your input!<br>

Miss C.</p><div></div>

<p>Thank you all so much for your kind responses. Much food for thought. I was pondering on renting, your comments have convinced me on that front. I need to experiment before making such a big investment on a lens. Also, upgrading my camera might indeed be a better investment for me at this point. I didn't realize going from a 30D to a 60D could make a significant difference. I will look into that. Also, I will definitely be shooting at the rehearsal, great tip. Many thanks again.</p>

<p>I have been offered the possibility of covering an indoor ballet show. I also plan on offering my services for various events (mainly kid shows & sport events). I will be offering my images for sale to parents, so quality is an important issue, though I won’t be making big enlargements (for now).<br>

<br />I am currently working with a Cannon 30D and a EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 IS lens. I feel this lens won’t allow me to get in close enough for certain events. After reading various posts in this forum, I am still unsure as the way to go.<br>

<br />I am looking at the following options:<br>

<br />a & b) 70-200mm 2.8 IS L (Cannon) <br />Two models are available here, the old and the new. Can anyone tell me what the new IS II model will offer more than its previous version? There’s about 1 000$ difference on the price tag…<br /><br />c) EF 135mm f/2L (Cannon) <br />This lens is about the same price at the older 70-200mm.<br /><br />d) I was told the Sigma 70-200 (EX-DG-OS-HSM) could also be a good choice, price similar to the older 70-200mm & 135mm.<br>

<br />For the ballet show context (stage lighting), I’m guessing I’m going to have to boost my ISO up to 1600 or 3200? Do you think I’ll be able to use a relatively high speed, at least 1/250s with these lenses and my current camera? I should be able to fix some the graininess in LR afterwards, but I will definitely need the high-speed to capture movement.<br>

<br />Thanks in advance for your insight.</p>

<p>Thank you all for yours kind responses. I'm only now (Monday evening) reading them, as I had unexpected business to attend to...<br>

To answer some of the questions, I mainly use Firefox. I didn't know about the problems iFrames pose for IE. The page I built is not from Flickr, but from my personnal site currently under construction (with white dominating as in Flickr).<br>

The way the gallery I built with iFrame works, the main large image changes with a click on a smaller image. The hoover option could be good too..<br>

I will look into JAlbums and DIVs and rollover galleries, even though I'm a tad discouraged at the propect of having to start all over again. None of those things ring a bell. I am totally new at website creation and barely understand basic HTML. I was so proud to have managed to create what I had (despite the centering problem).<br>

But if iFrames are going to be a problem, I'd rather get it right. I'll look more into this in the days to come. In the meantime, if anyone comes accross a specific site which could help me to configure a similar looking gallery using Divs or rollovers, it would again be much appreciated!</p>

 

<p>Oups, the screen capture below shows how the vertical images appear.<br>

I've added a black frame so you can better see the alingment.<br>

Also, I should state that all the images that appear are NOT mine. They are used here only for test purpuses.</p><div>[ATTACH=full]577639[/ATTACH]</div>

<p>I am building an image gallery for my new website, using tables and iframe.<br>

I am satisfied with the result for horizontal images (see attached file).<br>

But I would like to <strong>center the vertical images</strong>, which now appear to the left (see attached file).<br>

Here's the HTML code I used for the iframe:<br>

<br /><iframe name="frmPhotos" src="images/TestiFrame/wolf.jpg" frameborder="no" height="550" scrolling="no" width="100%"></iframe><br /><br /><br /><br>

I tried adding the following code to the iframe line without success:<br>

align="center"<br>

<br>

<br>

If you know the solution, thanks in advance for sharing!</p>

<div>[ATTACH=full]971696[/ATTACH]</div>

<p>Okay Gianluca. Thanks so much for your help. Cheers.</p>

<p>Gianluca,<br>

I see the check-box allowing me to delay the loading. Excellent!<br>

Could I also safely un-check the previous option that says: "Confirm display calibration status each time the application is launched"?</p>

<div></div>