Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: [SI] Mandate reminder/update & new mandate!

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: [SI] Mandate reminder/update & new mandate!

 
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-16-2010
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:12:32 -0400, Bowser <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: Just a reminder about the next mandate: Facescape. It's due May 16th,
: so find those faces full of character and send some shots.
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/facescape
:
: Next, the new mandate announcement: The Wallpaper Project. Here's what
: this means: I use a few of my shots as wallpaper on my PC; we all
: probably do. This mandate will challenge the shooter to produce the
: best wallpaper in wide screen format so other users can download and
: use the shot as wallpaper on their PC. All submissions must be 1920 x
: 1200 pixels to fill a wide monitor. Shooters are limited to ONE
: submission for this mandate only, so make your wallpaper a good one,
: and make sure it looks good at large sizes (like a 24" monitor). You
: may include your "signature" on the photo, as well. Lastly, the 300K
: file size limit is waived for this mandate.
:
: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/wallpaper
:
: Flame on!

It's an interesting idea, but I wonder if events haven't passed it by. In
Windows 7 you can have a slide show as your background, and they finally allow
you to specify that the picture must fit within your screen dimensions while
maintaining its aspect ratio. The practical effect is that some shots fill the
screen left-to-right and some fill it top-to-bottom, but pictures that fill a
1920 x 1200 screen exactly are rare (since no camera of which I'm aware uses
the 5x3 aspect ratio). I've cropped a few shots to 5x3, but usually to rescue
a shot that would have been discarded otherwise. Most of my (and my wife's)
best shots are 3x2, which I'll bet is true for most SI submitters. (Is 1920 x
1200 common? My Lenovo W500 uses it, but I don't think I've ever seen another
display that does.)

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-17-2010
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 10:06:58 -0400, Bowser <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 19:13:45 -0400, Robert Coe <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
:
: >On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:12:32 -0400, Bowser <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: >: Just a reminder about the next mandate: Facescape. It's due May 16th,
: >: so find those faces full of character and send some shots.
: >:
: >: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/facescape
: >:
: >: Next, the new mandate announcement: The Wallpaper Project. Here's what
: >: this means: I use a few of my shots as wallpaper on my PC; we all
: >: probably do. This mandate will challenge the shooter to produce the
: >: best wallpaper in wide screen format so other users can download and
: >: use the shot as wallpaper on their PC. All submissions must be 1920 x
: >: 1200 pixels to fill a wide monitor. Shooters are limited to ONE
: >: submission for this mandate only, so make your wallpaper a good one,
: >: and make sure it looks good at large sizes (like a 24" monitor). You
: >: may include your "signature" on the photo, as well. Lastly, the 300K
: >: file size limit is waived for this mandate.
: >:
: >: http://www.pbase.com/shootin/wallpaper
: >:
: >: Flame on!
: >
: >It's an interesting idea, but I wonder if events haven't passed it by. In
: >Windows 7 you can have a slide show as your background, and they finally allow
: >you to specify that the picture must fit within your screen dimensions while
: >maintaining its aspect ratio. The practical effect is that some shots fill the
: >screen left-to-right and some fill it top-to-bottom, but pictures that fill a
: >1920 x 1200 screen exactly are rare (since no camera of which I'm aware uses
: >the 5x3 aspect ratio). I've cropped a few shots to 5x3, but usually to rescue
: >a shot that would have been discarded otherwise. Most of my (and my wife's)
: >best shots are 3x2, which I'll bet is true for most SI submitters. (Is 1920 x
: >1200 common? My Lenovo W500 uses it, but I don't think I've ever seen another
: >display that does.)
: >
: >Bob
:
: Monitors that use a 16:10 aspect ration are the norm now.

I hadn't realized that. I've only ever used one wide-screen monitor, and
that's built into a laptop. At work I use only pairs of 5x4 monitors.

: Maybe not all use the full 1920 x 1200, but the aspect ration is the same,
: so if you have a smaller screen, the pic will rez down but retain its
: proportions. My HP 2475w is a 24" S-IPS monitor, and presents a very
: nice 1920 x 1200 image. Even good P&S cams can produce a decent shot
: at that resolution.

Yeah, if you happen to plan for the 8x5 aspect ratio when you take the
picture. It isn't native to any camera, P&S or DSLR, as far as I know.

The point I was circling, but never really got around to making, is that in
Windows 7 the incentive to carefully craft a wallpaper picture that exactly
matches the monitor is diminished, for two reasons: 1) You can now specify
that the background picture fit within the available space without being
stretched or truncated, and 2) the background can be a slideshow. In a
slideshow you're apt to have pictures of various aspect ratios, and you can
include them all without worrying that they'll get mangled if their aspect
ratios don't match that of the display. I used to be a stickler for matching
the background picture to the display; now that the computers I use regularly
at work are Windows 7, I don't bother.

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2010
George Kerby wrote:
>
>
> On 4/17/10 7:26 PM, in article
> 2010041717261354666-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck"
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:



>> So for me things currently look something like this:
>> with no folders open;
>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Desktop-01.jpg
>>
>> and with two open;
>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Desktop-02.jpg

>
> Thanks for the input. Nice capture of El Capitan, BTW.
>


Bu-bu-bu-but that's Half Dome!

--
john mcwilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2010
Savageduck wrote:
>
> Since my photo work flow is set using my bizzare system;
> 1. RAW copied to outboard Hard drive in folder labelled with shoot date,
> or other identifier.
> 2. Imported to Lightroom on MacBook Pro & converted to DNG.
> 3. Post processing in Lightroom, and/or CS4 via Lightroom.
> 4. JPEG output from LR exported to desktop folder, or saved from CS4 to
> the same folder.
> 5. JPEGS sorted into labelled sub-folders. I set the color field for the
> folder so that it isn't too harsh.


Interesting! Here's my work flow:

1. RAW imported directly into Lightroom. (my CF cards are the temp backup)
2. Immediate culling of dups and near dups, OoF, duds. Rough adjustments
if needed, all in LR.
3. If for commercial website, final edits, export to JPEG, one folder,
upload.
3a. If for own use only, near final edits, export to JPEG in 16:9
cropped format, perfect for HD tv. - via Flash Drive or maybe in future
via iPhoto.
4. Backup via TimeMachine

I usually rename the images [via LR] so I can pretty much tell what they
are in the Finder; same with folders that are maintained via Lightroom.

--
john mcwilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2010
"John McWilliams" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:hqn3v4$f48$(E-Mail Removed)-september.org...
> Savageduck wrote:
>>
>> Since my photo work flow is set using my bizzare system;
>> 1. RAW copied to outboard Hard drive in folder labelled with shoot date,
>> or other identifier.
>> 2. Imported to Lightroom on MacBook Pro & converted to DNG.
>> 3. Post processing in Lightroom, and/or CS4 via Lightroom.
>> 4. JPEG output from LR exported to desktop folder, or saved from CS4 to
>> the same folder.
>> 5. JPEGS sorted into labelled sub-folders. I set the color field for the
>> folder so that it isn't too harsh.

>
> Interesting! Here's my work flow:
>
> 1. RAW imported directly into Lightroom. (my CF cards are the temp backup)
> 2. Immediate culling of dups and near dups, OoF, duds. Rough adjustments
> if needed, all in LR.
> 3. If for commercial website, final edits, export to JPEG, one folder,
> upload.
> 3a. If for own use only, near final edits, export to JPEG in 16:9 cropped
> format, perfect for HD tv. - via Flash Drive or maybe in future via
> iPhoto.
> 4. Backup via TimeMachine
>
> I usually rename the images [via LR] so I can pretty much tell what they
> are in the Finder; same with folders that are maintained via Lightroom.
>


FWIIW Here's mine.

1. Download from CF Card using Bridge, use a dated and appropriately named
folder.
2. Cull
3. Cull
4. Backup to USB drive.
5. Stare through collection and work on the shots that tell me "hey I'm
next."

--
Peter

 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2010
Savageduck wrote:
> On 2010-04-21 07:50:37 -0700, John McWilliams <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>> George Kerby wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/17/10 7:26 PM, in article
>>> 2010041717261354666-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck"
>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>>
>>
>>>> So for me things currently look something like this:
>>>> with no folders open;
>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Desktop-01.jpg
>>>>
>>>> and with two open;
>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Desktop-02.jpg
>>>
>>> Thanks for the input. Nice capture of El Capitan, BTW.
>>>

>>
>> Bu-bu-bu-but that's Half Dome!

>
> OK, Here is my pseudo Adamsesque Vally shot from tunnel veiw, with El
> Cap, Bridal Veil Falls, & Halfdome in shot.
>
> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...DSC0964bww.jpg


Sweet! However, it's "Half Dome", and "Bridal Veil Fall". There is a
"Bridalveil Fall" at Niagara Falls, though.
While in pedantic mode, Yosemite Falls has two components: An "Upper
Yosemite Fall" and a "Lower Yosemite Fall".....


--
John McWilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2010
Savageduck wrote:
> On 2010-04-21 09:10:36 -0700, John McWilliams <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>> Savageduck wrote:
>>> On 2010-04-21 07:50:37 -0700, John McWilliams <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>>>
>>>> George Kerby wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/17/10 7:26 PM, in article
>>>>> 2010041717261354666-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck"
>>>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> So for me things currently look something like this:
>>>>>> with no folders open;
>>>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Desktop-01.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and with two open;
>>>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Desktop-02.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the input. Nice capture of El Capitan, BTW.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bu-bu-bu-but that's Half Dome!
>>>
>>> OK, Here is my pseudo Adamsesque Vally shot from tunnel veiw, with El
>>> Cap, Bridal Veil Falls, & Halfdome in shot.
>>>
>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...DSC0964bww.jpg

>>
>> Sweet! However, it's "Half Dome", and "Bridal Veil Fall". There is a
>> "Bridalveil Fall" at Niagara Falls, though.
>> While in pedantic mode, Yosemite Falls has two components: An "Upper
>> Yosemite Fall" and a "Lower Yosemite Fall".....

>
> OK, I'll do what I can to out pedant you. Yosemite actually has "Three"
> sections upper falls, middle cascade, and lower falls.
> My shot of Yosemite Falls from Glacier Point, showing all three sections;
> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...s-DSC0944w.jpg
>
> and
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yosemite_Falls


Heh! I'll grant you three sections, but still, it's Upper Yosemite Fall
and Lower Yosemite Fall. Wiki is wrong to put a plural on these singular
drops. The over all is, of course, "Yosemite Falls", which includes The
Cascade. Or the cascade, depending.....

Another fine shot.

--
John McWilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2010
Savageduck wrote:
> On 2010-04-21 08:00:00 -0700, John McWilliams <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>
>>> Since my photo work flow is set using my bizzare system;
>>> 1. RAW copied to outboard Hard drive in folder labelled with shoot
>>> date, or other identifier.
>>> 2. Imported to Lightroom on MacBook Pro & converted to DNG.
>>> 3. Post processing in Lightroom, and/or CS4 via Lightroom.
>>> 4. JPEG output from LR exported to desktop folder, or saved from CS4
>>> to the same folder.
>>> 5. JPEGS sorted into labelled sub-folders. I set the color field for
>>> the folder so that it isn't too harsh.

>>
>> Interesting! Here's my work flow:
>>
>> 1. RAW imported directly into Lightroom. (my CF cards are the temp
>> backup)

>
> Yup. That is my quick variation
>
>> 2. Immediate culling of dups and near dups, OoF, duds. Rough
>> adjustments if needed, all in LR.

>
> Yup.
>
>> 3. If for commercial website, final edits, export to JPEG, one folder,
>> upload.
>> 3a. If for own use only, near final edits, export to JPEG in 16:9
>> cropped format, perfect for HD tv. - via Flash Drive or maybe in
>> future via iPhoto.

>
> I am strictly a hobbyist, so I do everything for myself, family, or
> friends, no Pro work.
>
>> 4. Backup via TimeMachine

>
> LR DNR files are backed up via TimeMachine. NEFs are on 2 redundant hard
> drives.
>>
>> I usually rename the images [via LR] so I can pretty much tell what
>> they are in the Finder; same with folders that are maintained via
>> Lightroom.

>
> Yup.


Nice! Our major diff. seems to be I don't keep two extra copies. Oh, and
I usually convert to DNG but only after most editing (never say it's
done!) has been finished. That helps me see at a glance what's done, and
what's not.

--
John McWilliams


 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-21-2010
"Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:2010042109020631566-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
> On 2010-04-21 07:50:37 -0700, John McWilliams <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>> George Kerby wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/17/10 7:26 PM, in article
>>> 2010041717261354666-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck"
>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>>
>>
>>>> So for me things currently look something like this:
>>>> with no folders open;
>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Desktop-01.jpg
>>>>
>>>> and with two open;
>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Desktop-02.jpg
>>>
>>> Thanks for the input. Nice capture of El Capitan, BTW.
>>>

>>
>> Bu-bu-bu-but that's Half Dome!

>
> OK, Here is my pseudo Adamsesque Vally shot from tunnel veiw, with El Cap,
> Bridal Veil Falls, & Halfdome in shot.
>
> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...DSC0964bww.jpg
>



Great shot. Wish I had taken it. I can't think of anything to improve it,
without nitpicking.

OK One little nit. I would like to have seen the upper corners a tad darker,
especially on the left.


--
Peter

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ken Walls
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-22-2010
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 16:05:24 -0500, Allen <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Peter wrote:
>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>> news:2010042109020631566-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>> On 2010-04-21 07:50:37 -0700, John McWilliams <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>>>
>>>> George Kerby wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/17/10 7:26 PM, in article
>>>>> 2010041717261354666-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, "Savageduck"
>>>>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> So for me things currently look something like this:
>>>>>> with no folders open;
>>>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Desktop-01.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and with two open;
>>>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Desktop-02.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the input. Nice capture of El Capitan, BTW.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Bu-bu-bu-but that's Half Dome!
>>>
>>> OK, Here is my pseudo Adamsesque Vally shot from tunnel veiw, with El
>>> Cap, Bridal Veil Falls, & Halfdome in shot.
>>>
>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechut...DSC0964bww.jpg
>>>

>>
>>
>> Great shot. Wish I had taken it. I can't think of anything to improve
>> it, without nitpicking.
>>
>> OK One little nit. I would like to have seen the upper corners a tad
>> darker, especially on the left.
>>
>>

>Oh, go ahead, Play like you're John McWilliams, except be more accurate
>in your nitpicking.
>Allen


It's amazing.

How you can take a perfectly majestic scene that will provide a nice photo
for any snapshooter with the most basic of dime-store cameras, without them
even trying to make it look good, and somehow you still managed to ruin it
by unnaturally tilting it and turning it into a muddy mess with blown-out
highlights. Even a 4 year old would have come back with something
worthwhile by using a disposable camera.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Re: [SI] Mandate reminder/update & new mandate! Robert Spanjaard Digital Photography 9 04-26-2010 10:17 PM
Re: Mandate reminder/update & new mandate! Annika1980 Digital Photography 3 04-17-2010 10:37 PM
[SI] Shoot in photography challenge - New mandate - try it out! Alan Browne Digital Photography 10 06-05-2005 06:26 AM
[SI] new mandate. Alan Browne Digital Photography 0 03-28-2005 04:49 PM
[SI] New Mandate Annika198O Digital Photography 26 02-17-2004 01:55 PM



Advertisments