BIG BIRDS LOVE THE D60 !!!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Annika1980, Jun 30, 2004.

  1. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Jun 30, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. John McWilliams, Jun 30, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Pittsburgh bound, Jun 30, 2004
    #3
  4. (Annika1980) wrote in message news:<>...
    > Took this one today.
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/image/30758816/original


    It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    blur and oversharpening artifacts left over, with very, very poor DR.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Jun 30, 2004
    #4
  5. (Georgette Preddy) wrote in
    news::

    > (Annika1980) wrote in message
    > news:<>...
    >> Took this one today.
    >>
    >> http://www.pbase.com/image/30758816/original

    >
    > It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    > blur and oversharpening artifacts left over, with very, very poor DR.
    >


    Hi Steve, good to see you back again.

    --
    "Live fast. Die young." (Nikki Sixx)

    -Richard Cockburn
     
    Richard Cockburn, Jun 30, 2004
    #5
  6. Annika1980

    jean Guest

    > It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    > blur and oversharpening artifacts left over, with very, very poor DR.


    Well, prove you can do better preddidiot!
     
    jean, Jun 30, 2004
    #6
  7. Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Jul 1, 2004
    #7
  8. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    >From: "jean"

    >> It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    >> blur and oversharpening artifacts left over, with very, very poor DR.

    >
    >Well, prove you can do better preddidiot!


    Not likely. Eagles don't go near trolls.
     
    Annika1980, Jul 1, 2004
    #8
  9. Richard Cockburn <> wrote in message news:<Xns951844F983A19cockburnwebjettersco@130.133.1.4>...
    > (Georgette Preddy) wrote in
    > news::
    >
    > > (Annika1980) wrote in message
    > > news:<>...
    > >> Took this one today.
    > >>
    > >> http://www.pbase.com/image/30758816/original

    > >
    > > It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    > > blur and oversharpening artifacts left over, with very, very poor DR.
    > >

    >
    > Hi Steve, good to see you back again.


    Hi Martha, hope prison is treating you well.
     
    Georgette Preddy, Jul 1, 2004
    #9
  10. Annika1980

    Guest

    In message <>,
    (Georgette Preddy) wrote:

    > (Annika1980) wrote in message news:<>...
    >> Took this one today.
    >>
    >> http://www.pbase.com/image/30758816/original

    >
    >It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    >blur and oversharpening artifacts left over,


    If you ever decided to shoot things other than Spanish Missions in
    Texas, or Korean fruit stands at night, you would learn that with action
    and wildlife photo, the resolution of your imaging is a theoretical
    maximum that is rarely achieved.

    >with very, very poor DR.


    How do you know what the DR of RAW data is?

    http://www.pbase.com/image/30794207


    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Jul 2, 2004
    #10
  11. wrote in message news:<>...

    > >with very, very poor DR.

    >
    > How do you know what the DR of RAW data is?
    >
    > http://www.pbase.com/image/30794207


    What a mess! Looks massively "Neat Imaged" (same thing Canon does by
    default so its hard to tell which computer ruined the picture, the
    desktop's or the camera's) with maybe 1/4th the DR of Foveon images.
    The lens is junk too.
     
    George Preddy, Jul 2, 2004
    #11
  12. wrote in message news:<>...
    > In message <>,
    > (Georgette Preddy) wrote:
    >
    > > (Annika1980) wrote in message news:<>...
    > >> Took this one today.
    > >>
    > >> http://www.pbase.com/image/30758816/original

    > >
    > >It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    > >blur and oversharpening artifacts left over,

    >
    > If you ever decided to shoot things other than Spanish Missions in
    > Texas, or Korean fruit stands at night, you would learn that with action
    > and wildlife photo, the resolution of your imaging is a theoretical
    > maximum that is rarely achieved.


    Hey look at that, I went from not owning a camera according to you to
    achieving maximum resolution in all my images.
     
    George Preddy, Jul 2, 2004
    #12
  13. wrote in message news:<>...
    > In message <>,
    > (Georgette Preddy) wrote:
    >
    > > (Annika1980) wrote in message news:<>...
    > >> Took this one today.
    > >>
    > >> http://www.pbase.com/image/30758816/original

    > >
    > >It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    > >blur and oversharpening artifacts left over,

    >
    > If you ever decided to shoot things other than Spanish Missions in
    > Texas, or Korean fruit stands at night, you would learn that with action
    > and wildlife photo, the resolution of your imaging is a theoretical
    > maximum that is rarely achieved.


    Hey look at that, I went from not owning a camera according to you to
    achieving maximum resolution in all my images.
     
    George Preddy, Jul 2, 2004
    #13
  14. wrote in message news:<>...
    > In message <>,
    > (Georgette Preddy) wrote:
    >
    > > (Annika1980) wrote in message news:<>...
    > >> Took this one today.
    > >>
    > >> http://www.pbase.com/image/30758816/original

    > >
    > >It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    > >blur and oversharpening artifacts left over,

    >
    > If you ever decided to shoot things other than Spanish Missions in
    > Texas, or Korean fruit stands at night, you would learn that with action
    > and wildlife photo, the resolution of your imaging is a theoretical
    > maximum that is rarely achieved.


    Hey look at that, I went from not owning a camera according to you to
    achieving maximum resolution in all my images.
     
    George Preddy, Jul 2, 2004
    #14
  15. George Preddy, Jul 2, 2004
    #15
  16. Annika1980

    Guest

    On 2 Jul 2004 08:22:46 -0700, (George Preddy)
    wrote:

    > wrote in message news:<>...
    >> In message <>,
    >> (Georgette Preddy) wrote:
    >>
    >> > (Annika1980) wrote in message news:<>...
    >> >> Took this one today.
    >> >>
    >> >> http://www.pbase.com/image/30758816/original
    >> >
    >> >It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    >> >blur and oversharpening artifacts left over,

    >>
    >> If you ever decided to shoot things other than Spanish Missions in
    >> Texas, or Korean fruit stands at night, you would learn that with action
    >> and wildlife photo, the resolution of your imaging is a theoretical
    >> maximum that is rarely achieved.

    >
    >Hey look at that, I went from not owning a camera according to you to
    >achieving maximum resolution in all my images.

    My work here is finished. It's been fun. That's all folks!

    You promised Steve
     
    , Jul 2, 2004
    #16
  17. (Annika1980) wrote in news:20040630230507.19329.00000747
    @mb-m17.aol.com:

    >>Well, prove you can do better preddidiot!

    >
    > Not likely. Eagles don't go near trolls.


    Good one!

    Annika - so you are not a troll then? Honest?


    /Roland
     
    Roland Karlsson, Jul 2, 2004
    #17
  18. Annika1980

    Guest

    In message <>,
    (George Preddy) wrote:

    > wrote in message >news:<>...


    >> >with very, very poor DR.


    >> How do you know what the DR of RAW data is?


    >> http://www.pbase.com/image/30794207


    >What a mess!


    I never said it wasn't. I wouldn't give you a good picture in full
    resolution. I just chose it as an obvious example of dynamic range. I
    could not see the beams in the ceiling with my naked eye, in real life,
    standing in front of this abandoned tenement in Manhattan's Lower East
    Side. It was all black inside.

    >Looks massively "Neat Imaged" (same thing Canon does by
    >default so its hard to tell which computer ruined the picture, the
    >desktop's or the camera's)


    The image has default (almost no) sharpening.

    >with maybe 1/4th the DR of Foveon images.


    You are an idiot; it would take about 36 bits of RAW linear data per
    channel to have 4x as much dynamic range as this picture has.

    >The lens is junk too.


    I said before, the image is not sharpened.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Jul 2, 2004
    #18
  19. Annika1980

    Guest

    In message <>,
    (George Preddy) wrote:

    > wrote in message news:<>...
    >> In message <>,
    >> (Georgette Preddy) wrote:
    >>
    >> > (Annika1980) wrote in message news:<>...
    >> >> Took this one today.
    >> >>
    >> >> http://www.pbase.com/image/30758816/original
    >> >
    >> >It a nice shot, too bad the D60 made it 0.2MP usable with some visible
    >> >blur and oversharpening artifacts left over,

    >>
    >> If you ever decided to shoot things other than Spanish Missions in
    >> Texas, or Korean fruit stands at night, you would learn that with action
    >> and wildlife photo, the resolution of your imaging is a theoretical
    >> maximum that is rarely achieved.

    >
    >Hey look at that, I went from not owning a camera according to you to
    >achieving maximum resolution in all my images.


    *I* never said you don't own a camera, you pathetic piece of crap.

    In fact, I have said many times that people who say that you don't own a
    camera look foolish.

    And no, I don't think that you're Orville Wright, or Giorgi, or Guido,
    or Laurence, so don't play this multiple-personality nonsense with me.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Jul 2, 2004
    #19
  20. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    >From: Roland Karlsson

    >> Not likely. Eagles don't go near trolls.

    >
    >Good one!
    >
    >Annika - so you are not a troll then? Honest?


    I guess not. Eagles don't lie.
     
    Annika1980, Jul 3, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Annika1980

    TEXANS LOVE THE D60 !!!

    Annika1980, Oct 16, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    301
    Mark Hanson
    Oct 16, 2003
  2. Annika1980

    BIG BIRDS LOVE THE 20D !!!

    Annika1980, Dec 3, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    450
    Ken Tough
    Dec 4, 2004
  3. Annika1980

    BIG BIRDS "FLOCK" TO THE 20D !!!

    Annika1980, Jan 8, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    36
    Views:
    710
    Roland Karlsson
    Jan 11, 2005
  4. Annika1980

    T-BIRDS LOVE THE 20D !

    Annika1980, Nov 22, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    293
    Annika1980
    Nov 23, 2006
  5. Annika1980

    REALLY BIG BIRDS LOVE THE 40D !

    Annika1980, Oct 14, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    77
    Views:
    1,718
    John Turco
    Oct 30, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page