Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Possible new feature for next Photoshop

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Possible new feature for next Photoshop

 
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-11-2011
notbob <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I can't disagree. I'd rather spend my time/money on the front end of
>the process. Equipment, location, composition, etc.
>
>In fact, I'm rather dismayed by the change in perceptions of what
>constitutes good photography in this post digital world. Too often I
>see terribly garish HDR shots being passed off as good photography. A
>recent issue of Outdoor Photography had one of the columnists patting
>himself on the back about how he'd transformed his admittedly mediocre
>shot of a lone pine tree with some low sun backlighting into a "WOW"
>shot with HDR. It was hideous! Looked more like a LSD flashback gone
>bad or a corpse in clown makeup. Sorry, but a crappy photo is a
>crappy photo, regardless of one's "process".



I can't disagree with that either.

I'm searching for some property (US English: real estate) for a
relation. It involves trawling through endless adverts on a property
web site, each of which has a selection of images (plus regular visits
to the area and viewings).

One of the estate agents (realtors?) in the area of the UK where I am
looking makes extensive use of crudely applied HDR images, and they
are really crappy. In most cases, the advert shows two images of the
same thing - one with HDR and one without. The HDR effect is extreme
but it is actually quite useful because it enables the interior of a
room and its view to the exterior to be seen together.

It's crappy photography, but good advertising. Unattractive, yes, but
strangely useful. I would not want it on my wall at home, but it
might help us to find the right property.




 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2011
On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:36:35 +0100, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>One of the estate agents (realtors?) in the area of the UK where I am..


I doubt if there are realtors in the UK. In the US, the term
"Realtor" is a registered designation for a member of the National
Association of Realtors.

In the US, anyone licensed to sell or rent property is a real estate
agent. If that person joins and pays dues to the NAR, the person can
dub themselves a Realtor. Actually, NAR always capitalizes it thusly:
REALTORŪ.

The NAR actually gives a **** and writes nasty letters to publications
that write "realtor". No one else gives a ****, though.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Charles E. Hardwidge
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2011

"tony cooper" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:36:35 +0100, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>One of the estate agents (realtors?) in the area of the UK where I am..

>
> I doubt if there are realtors in the UK. In the US, the term
> "Realtor" is a registered designation for a member of the National
> Association of Realtors.


What, like that self-build shed association Sisker had going?

The NAR would write snotty letters because if you don't defend a trademark
you lose it but as it looks like it's status has been made generic by mass
use (to my UK ears) I'm not sure it would survive in court.

--
Charles E. Hardwidge
 
Reply With Quote
 
Trevor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2011

"Martin Brown" <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:0bZkq.2582$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Undoubtedly. It is unwise to put too much faith in its capabilities.


Since when do you put "faith" in any such tools, you use them if you think
think they might improve an existing photo, and ignore them when they don't.

Trevor.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Trevor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2011

"Pete A" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:2011101116371731193-pete3attkins@nospamntlworldcom...
>MS Paint can produce better art than most high-tech button pushers will
>ever achieve,



Wow, that says a lot more about you if you think any serious photographer
could manage with MS Paint! There are of course many reasonable alternatives
to Adobe Photoshop, but I wouldn't rate MS Paint as one of them! Hell most
camera's already come with far better software included, even the cheap
ones!


> It seems to me that some spend more on Adobe software than on their camera
> equipment. I call it a demonstration of Adobe's astute business acumen.


Perhaps, or just the stupidity of anyone who'd buy a cheap camera and Adobe
PS rather than a better camera and PS Elements, or one of the free
alternatives. Frankly I seriously doubt anyone who actually buys the full
version of Adobe PS is a novice with a cheap camera!

Trevor.




 
Reply With Quote
 
Trevor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2011

"Bruce" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> One of the estate agents (realtors?) in the area of the UK where I am
> looking makes extensive use of crudely applied HDR images, and they
> are really crappy. In most cases, the advert shows two images of the
> same thing - one with HDR and one without. The HDR effect is extreme
> but it is actually quite useful because it enables the interior of a
> room and its view to the exterior to be seen together.
>
> It's crappy photography, but good advertising. Unattractive, yes, but
> strangely useful. I would not want it on my wall at home, but it
> might help us to find the right property.



Exactly, seems he knows exactly the market he is addressing, and it's not
someone who is after a fine art print for the wall! Some just don't get it
though.

Trevor.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2011
tony cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:36:35 +0100, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:
>
>>One of the estate agents (realtors?) in the area of the UK where I am..

>
>I doubt if there are realtors in the UK. In the US, the term
>"Realtor" is a registered designation for a member of the National
>Association of Realtors.
>
>In the US, anyone licensed to sell or rent property is a real estate
>agent. If that person joins and pays dues to the NAR, the person can
>dub themselves a Realtor. Actually, NAR always capitalizes it thusly:
>REALTORŪ.
>
>The NAR actually gives a **** and writes nasty letters to publications
>that write "realtor". No one else gives a ****, though.



Thanks. I was in doubt, hence the question mark. So what do you
call, on your side of the pond, the people we call "estate agents"?
They are the people who market domestic property.

We also have "surveyors" who need to be professionally qualified,
whereas estate agents are just salesmen/women with no requirement for
qualifications.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Trevor
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2011

"Bruce" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> We also have "surveyors" who need to be professionally qualified,
> whereas estate agents are just salesmen/women with no requirement for
> qualifications.


Real Estate Agents have to be qualified (only a short course) and licensed
in Australia. Agents Representitives who do most of the work are not usually
qualified in any way however. Surveyors here play no part in selling
properties, but may be hired to check boundaries etc. during a sale.

Trevor.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2011
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>On 2011-10-12 00:54:24 -0700, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>> tony cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:36:35 +0100, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> One of the estate agents (realtors?) in the area of the UK where I am..
>>>
>>> I doubt if there are realtors in the UK. In the US, the term
>>> "Realtor" is a registered designation for a member of the National
>>> Association of Realtors.
>>>
>>> In the US, anyone licensed to sell or rent property is a real estate
>>> agent. If that person joins and pays dues to the NAR, the person can
>>> dub themselves a Realtor. Actually, NAR always capitalizes it thusly:
>>> REALTORŪ.
>>>
>>> The NAR actually gives a **** and writes nasty letters to publications
>>> that write "realtor". No one else gives a ****, though.

>>
>>
>> Thanks. I was in doubt, hence the question mark. So what do you
>> call, on your side of the pond, the people we call "estate agents"?
>> They are the people who market domestic property.
>>
>> We also have "surveyors" who need to be professionally qualified,
>> whereas estate agents are just salesmen/women with no requirement for
>> qualifications.

>
>A real estate agent, or real estate broker who is a member of the
>National Association of Realtors (NAR) is termed a "Realtor" and they
>serve the same purpose and function as an "estate agent" in the UK.



That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure, hence the question mark.

Thanks.

 
Reply With Quote
 
tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-12-2011
On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:54:24 +0100, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>tony cooper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:36:35 +0100, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>One of the estate agents (realtors?) in the area of the UK where I am..

>>
>>I doubt if there are realtors in the UK. In the US, the term
>>"Realtor" is a registered designation for a member of the National
>>Association of Realtors.
>>
>>In the US, anyone licensed to sell or rent property is a real estate
>>agent. If that person joins and pays dues to the NAR, the person can
>>dub themselves a Realtor. Actually, NAR always capitalizes it thusly:
>>REALTORŪ.
>>
>>The NAR actually gives a **** and writes nasty letters to publications
>>that write "realtor". No one else gives a ****, though.

>
>
>Thanks. I was in doubt, hence the question mark. So what do you
>call, on your side of the pond, the people we call "estate agents"?
>They are the people who market domestic property.


We call them "real estate agents" or "realtors". We often use and
write the term "realtor" incorrectly, but it's a commonly used term.

>We also have "surveyors" who need to be professionally qualified,
>whereas estate agents are just salesmen/women with no requirement for
>qualifications.


Laws in the US vary from state-to-state, but in most (if not all)
states one must be licensed to sell real estate. In Florida, there is
a required training course and a state test. Additional training
courses are required annually to maintain the license.

Another difference is that we are not required (in most, if not all)
states to use an attorney to complete a real estate transaction. The
closing (final papers) can be done by a title company. We can, of
course, use an attorney if we choose to.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
 
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: Possible new feature for next Photoshop PeterN Digital Photography 10 10-23-2011 07:33 PM
Re: Possible new feature for next Photoshop Trevor Digital Photography 9 10-17-2011 05:08 PM
Best Photoshop Feature You've Never Heard Of? Annika1980 Digital Photography 2 12-12-2005 04:50 PM
CurrentElement->next = CurrentElement->next->next (UNDEFINED?) Deniz Bahar C Programming 2 03-09-2005 12:45 AM



Advertisments