LDR

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Tony Cooper, Jun 26, 2013.

  1. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    Tony Cooper, Jun 26, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David Hare-Scott, Jun 26, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Tony Cooper

    Pablo Guest

    Pablo, Jun 26, 2013
    #3
  4. Tony Cooper

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 5:25:54 AM UTC+1, Tony Cooper wrote:
    > Restrain yourselves, you HDR people.


    So why's the subject line LDR ...
    I was hoping they'd discovered a new Light dependant Resistor I could buy.
    Whisky-dave, Jun 26, 2013
    #4
  5. Tony Cooper

    David Taylor Guest

    David Taylor, Jun 26, 2013
    #5
  6. Tony Cooper

    peternew Guest

    On 6/26/2013 12:57 AM, Savageduck wrote:
    > On 2013-06-25 21:25:54 -0700, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >
    >> Restrain yourselves, you HDR people. I don't want high definition
    >> here. Hold yourselves back, you anti-noise people. The noise is fine
    >> with me.
    >>
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-WXnfLWT/0/X2/2013-06-16-14C-X2.jpg
    >>

    >
    > What
    >>

    > are you talking about? That is just fine.
    > Nice work!
    >
    > ...though I might have gone about things slightly differently, but that
    > is just me.
    >


    It is a well composed image. The grain adds to his image. I do find my
    eye drawnto the window, which is too bright for my taste.


    --
    PeterN
    peternew, Jun 26, 2013
    #6
  7. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 02:49:42 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
    <> wrote:

    >On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 5:25:54 AM UTC+1, Tony Cooper wrote:
    >> Restrain yourselves, you HDR people.

    >
    >So why's the subject line LDR ...
    >I was hoping they'd discovered a new Light dependant Resistor I could buy.



    LDR = Low Dynamic Range
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
    Tony Cooper, Jun 26, 2013
    #7
  8. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 21:57:13 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2013-06-25 21:25:54 -0700, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >
    >> Restrain yourselves, you HDR people. I don't want high definition
    >> here. Hold yourselves back, you anti-noise people. The noise is fine
    >> with me.
    >>
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-WXnfLWT/0/X2/2013-06-16-14C-X2.jpg

    >
    >What
    >>

    >are you talking about? That is just fine.
    >Nice work!
    >
    >...though I might have gone about things slightly differently, but that
    >is just me.


    You would *always* go about things a bit differently! But, that's
    what makes photography interesting; no two people see the same scene
    as something to be treated the same. How dull art - in any medium -
    would be if we all came up with the same version.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
    Tony Cooper, Jun 26, 2013
    #8
  9. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 08:47:51 -0400, peternew <>
    wrote:

    >On 6/26/2013 12:57 AM, Savageduck wrote:
    >> On 2013-06-25 21:25:54 -0700, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >>
    >>> Restrain yourselves, you HDR people. I don't want high definition
    >>> here. Hold yourselves back, you anti-noise people. The noise is fine
    >>> with me.
    >>>
    >>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-WXnfLWT/0/X2/2013-06-16-14C-X2.jpg
    >>>

    >>
    >> What
    >>>

    >> are you talking about? That is just fine.
    >> Nice work!
    >>
    >> ...though I might have gone about things slightly differently, but that
    >> is just me.
    >>

    >
    >It is a well composed image. The grain adds to his image. I do find my
    >eye drawnto the window, which is too bright for my taste.


    The window is not really too bright. You see it as bright because
    everything else in the image is in the dark. If the rest of the scene
    is brightened up, the window light looks quite normal. But, then,
    that's the way I processed it to look.





    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
    Tony Cooper, Jun 26, 2013
    #9
  10. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 18:01:20 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
    <> wrote:

    >Tony Cooper wrote:
    >> Restrain yourselves, you HDR people. I don't want high definition
    >> here. Hold yourselves back, you anti-noise people. The noise is fine
    >> with me.
    >>
    >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-WXnfLWT/0/X2/2013-06-16-14C-X2.jpg

    >
    >I don't mind the grainyness in this case but why is it there?
    >

    Because I put it there. For effect.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
    Tony Cooper, Jun 26, 2013
    #10
  11. Tony Cooper

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 2:39:23 PM UTC+1, Tony Cooper wrote:
    > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 18:01:20 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
    >
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > >Tony Cooper wrote:

    >
    > >> Restrain yourselves, you HDR people. I don't want high definition

    >
    > >> here. Hold yourselves back, you anti-noise people. The noise is fine

    >
    > >> with me.

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-WXnfLWT/0/X2/2013-06-16-14C-X2.jpg

    >
    > >

    >
    > >I don't mind the grainyness in this case but why is it there?

    >
    > >

    >
    > Because I put it there. For effect.


    The bottles worry me, what were they for, why are they empty. :)
    Other than that I don't find much of interest in the picture.
    Whisky-dave, Jun 26, 2013
    #11
  12. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 07:22:31 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

    >On 2013-06-26 07:11:14 -0700, Whisky-dave <> said:
    >
    >> On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 2:39:23 PM UTC+1, Tony Cooper wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 18:01:20 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"
    >>>
    >>> <> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Tony Cooper wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>> Restrain yourselves, you HDR people. I don't want high definition
    >>>
    >>>>> here. Hold yourselves back, you anti-noise people. The noise is fine
    >>>
    >>>>> with me.
    >>>
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-WXnfLWT/0/X2/2013-06-16-14C-X2.jpg

    >
    >
    >
    >I
    >>>>>
    >>>> don't mind the grainyness in this case but why is it there?
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Because I put it there. For effect.

    >>
    >> The bottles worry me, what were they for, why are they empty. :)
    >> Other than that I don't find much of interest in the picture.

    >
    >Dave's usenet client worries me.
    >Why doesn't he drop that piece of crap G2/1.0 which makes life
    >miserable for anybody trying to follow a thread he involves himself in?


    I rarely read a full posting by Dave. I can't be arsed to scroll
    across for every line.

    I don't mind his comment that he doesn't find much interest in my
    image. There's no universal appeal to any image, and we shouldn't
    expect it.

    But, his question about why the empty bottles are there and why they
    are empty flabbergasts me. Why is a tree?

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
    Tony Cooper, Jun 26, 2013
    #12
  13. Tony Cooper

    peternew Guest

    On 6/26/2013 9:37 AM, Tony Cooper wrote:
    > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 08:47:51 -0400, peternew <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> On 6/26/2013 12:57 AM, Savageduck wrote:
    >>> On 2013-06-25 21:25:54 -0700, Tony Cooper <> said:
    >>>
    >>>> Restrain yourselves, you HDR people. I don't want high definition
    >>>> here. Hold yourselves back, you anti-noise people. The noise is fine
    >>>> with me.
    >>>>
    >>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-WXnfLWT/0/X2/2013-06-16-14C-X2.jpg
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> What
    >>>>
    >>> are you talking about? That is just fine.
    >>> Nice work!
    >>>
    >>> ...though I might have gone about things slightly differently, but that
    >>> is just me.
    >>>

    >>
    >> It is a well composed image. The grain adds to his image. I do find my
    >> eye drawnto the window, which is too bright for my taste.

    >
    > The window is not really too bright. You see it as bright because
    > everything else in the image is in the dark. If the rest of the scene
    > is brightened up, the window light looks quite normal. But, then,
    > that's the way I processed it to look.
    >


    OK. Fair enough.


    --
    PeterN
    peternew, Jun 26, 2013
    #13
  14. On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 15:11:14 UTC+1, Whisky-dave wrote:
    > On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 2:39:23 PM UTC+1, Tony Cooper wrote:

    [...]
    >
    > > >> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-WXnfLWT/0/X2/2013-06-16-14C-X2.jpg


    >
    > The bottles worry me, what were they for, why are they empty. :)
    >
    > Other than that I don't find much of interest in the picture.


    The bottles do look rather clean, cleaner than the glass in the paraffin lamp.

    One imagines they would more usually be dusty, and probably covered in cobwebs.
    pensive hamster, Jun 26, 2013
    #14
  15. Tony Cooper

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 15:31:45 UTC+1, Tony Cooper wrote:
    > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 07:22:31 -0700, Savageduck
    >
    > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > >On 2013-06-26 07:11:14 -0700, Whisky-dave <> said:

    >
    > >

    >
    > >> On Wednesday, June 26, 2013 2:39:23 PM UTC+1, Tony Cooper wrote:

    >
    > >>> On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 18:01:20 +1000, "David Hare-Scott"

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>> <> wrote:

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>>> Tony Cooper wrote:

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>>>> Restrain yourselves, you HDR people. I don't want high definition

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>>>> here. Hold yourselves back, you anti-noise people. The noise is fine

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>>>> with me.

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>>>>

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>>>> http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Other/Current-Favorite-Shot/i-WXnfLWT/0/X2/2013-06-16-14C-X2.jpg

    >
    > >

    >
    > >

    >
    > >

    >
    > >I

    >
    > >>>>>

    >
    > >>>> don't mind the grainyness in this case but why is it there?

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>>>

    >
    > >>>

    >
    > >>> Because I put it there. For effect.

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> The bottles worry me, what were they for, why are they empty. :)

    >
    > >> Other than that I don't find much of interest in the picture.

    >
    > >

    >
    > >Dave's usenet client worries me.

    >
    > >Why doesn't he drop that piece of crap G2/1.0 which makes life

    >
    > >miserable for anybody trying to follow a thread he involves himself in?

    >
    >
    >
    > I rarely read a full posting by Dave. I can't be arsed to scroll
    >
    > across for every line.


    I'll try to make them shorter.


    > I don't mind his comment that he doesn't find much interest in my
    >
    > image. There's no universal appeal to any image, and we shouldn't
    >
    > expect it.

    I have a similar image I took in the late 70s, and I vaguely remmeber a judge commenting on why particular objects were in the scene.
    I had no idea either, ass it was a village workshop that had been left 'as is' to show how woodworking was done 50-100 yeras ago.


    > But, his question about why the empty bottles are there and why they
    >
    > are empty flabbergasts me. Why is a tree?


    If it's a working workshop why are they empty if it's a show workshop what was meant to be in them, whisky, water, Carbon tetrachloride ?
    Why Carbon tetrachloride? well I was looking for some a week ago and it was the first chemical that came to mind, for the brown bottle.

    I did find the window kept drawing me in as there was little else to look at it wasn;t meant as a critism it's just how I saw the picture.
    Whisky-dave, Jun 27, 2013
    #15
  16. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:34:52 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
    <> wrote:

    >> I rarely read a full posting by Dave. I can't be arsed to scroll
    >>
    >> across for every line.

    >
    >I'll try to make them shorter.


    Thank you. If you don't use a program that allows you to set your
    line length at 72 characters, then manually insert breaks. It will be
    appreciated.
    >
    >> I don't mind his comment that he doesn't find much interest in my
    >> image. There's no universal appeal to any image, and we shouldn't
    >> expect it.


    >I have a similar image I took in the late 70s, and I vaguely remmeber a judge commenting on why particular objects were in the scene.
    >I had no idea either, ass it was a village workshop that had been left 'as is' to show how woodworking was done 50-100 yeras ago.
    >
    >> But, his question about why the empty bottles are there and why they
    >> are empty flabbergasts me. Why is a tree?

    >
    >If it's a working workshop why are they empty if it's a show workshop what was meant to be in them, whisky, water, Carbon tetrachloride ?
    >Why Carbon tetrachloride? well I was looking for some a week ago and it was the first chemical that came to mind, for the brown bottle.


    It's not a working workshop. It's a room in a barn at the Marjorie
    Kinnan Rawlings State Park that has been left as it was when Rawlings
    lived there in the early 1950s. I shot from another window and did
    not arrange the scene.

    >I did find the window kept drawing me in as there was little else to look at it wasn;t meant as a critism it's just how I saw the picture.


    That's fine, and your impression is what I expect in a comment. The
    image was shot and processed in such a way to draw the eye to the
    window. If I wanted to reveal the items on the workbench, I would
    have used flash or increased the exposure in RAW. The specific actual
    items are, in my opinion, incidental to the scene.

    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
    Tony Cooper, Jun 27, 2013
    #16
  17. Tony Cooper

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Thursday, 27 June 2013 17:08:50 UTC+1, Tony Cooper wrote:
    > On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 08:34:52 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
    >
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > >> I rarely read a full posting by Dave. I can't be arsed to scroll

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> across for every line.

    >
    > >

    >
    > >I'll try to make them shorter.

    >
    >
    >
    > Thank you. If you don't use a program that allows you to set your
    >
    > line length at 72 characters, then manually insert breaks. It will be
    >
    > appreciated.


    Trouble is I see your post as double line spaced mine looks great[1]

    How do you set line lenghts ?


    >
    > >> I don't mind his comment that he doesn't find much interest in my

    >
    > >> image. There's no universal appeal to any image, and we shouldn't

    >
    > >> expect it.

    >
    >
    >
    > >I have a similar image I took in the late 70s, and I vaguely remmeber a judge commenting on why particular objects were in the scene.

    >
    > >I had no idea either, ass it was a village workshop that had been left 'as is' to show how woodworking was done 50-100 yeras ago.

    >
    > >

    >
    > >> But, his question about why the empty bottles are there and why they

    >
    > >> are empty flabbergasts me. Why is a tree?

    >
    > >

    >
    > >If it's a working workshop why are they empty if it's a show workshop what was meant to be in them, whisky, water, Carbon tetrachloride ?

    >
    > >Why Carbon tetrachloride? well I was looking for some a week ago and it was the first chemical that came to mind, for the brown bottle.

    >
    >
    >
    > It's not a working workshop. It's a room in a barn at the Marjorie
    >
    > Kinnan Rawlings State Park that has been left as it was when Rawlings
    >
    > lived there in the early 1950s.


    Ah so similar setup to my photo, which I'll try to find, scan and upload, after all it's only fair you get the chance to comment on mine.

    > I shot from another window and did
    >
    > not arrange the scene.


    Me niether, but when asking for a picture to be judged or commented on....
    I can think of quite a bit to ramble on about regarding the SI.

    >
    >
    >
    > >I did find the window kept drawing me in as there was little else to look at it wasn;t meant as a critism it's just how I saw the picture.

    >
    >
    >
    > That's fine, and your impression is what I expect in a comment. The
    >
    > image was shot and processed in such a way to draw the eye to the
    >
    > window. If I wanted to reveal the items on the workbench, I would
    >
    > have used flash or increased the exposure in RAW. The specific actual
    >
    > items are, in my opinion, incidental to the scene.


    if it's the scene you are recording them expect people to notice what's in or not in the scene. One of teh biggest problems and issues my father had wass when taking pictures of cottages adn old building in country setting, it was teh TV areial and later sat. dishes, judge always commented about TV areals spoling his pictures but what was he meant to do about it?.
    rememer this was mid 70s before digital editing.
    But these 'faults' were enough to mark the picture down as far as how good it was compitition wise.



    Again all my lines are single spaced, my lines wrap corectly but don't add extra ">" when the line breaks, whereas yours appear to give a line feed and carragige return at the end of each line, which results in double spacing..
    Whisky-dave, Jun 28, 2013
    #17
  18. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 06:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
    <> wrote:

    >> >If it's a working workshop why are they empty if it's a show workshop what was meant to be in them, whisky, water, Carbon tetrachloride ?
    >> >Why Carbon tetrachloride? well I was looking for some a week ago and it was the first chemical that came to mind, for the brown bottle.

    >>
    >> It's not a working workshop. It's a room in a barn at the Marjorie
    >> Kinnan Rawlings State Park that has been left as it was when Rawlings
    >> lived there in the early 1950s.

    >
    >Ah so similar setup to my photo, which I'll try to find, scan and upload, after all it's only fair you get the chance to comment on mine.
    >

    Don't worry about "fairness" in this sense in any comments I'd make. I
    view a photograph on its own merits without any consideration of who
    posts it or any comments that person has made on my photographs.

    Once you get beyond the mechanical aspects of proper exposure and
    focus, as far as I'm concerned the rest is a form of art. We become
    artists of a sort when we compose by cropping and treatment in
    post-processing. I don't think you can say that any artistic
    expression is either right or wrong or pleasing or displeasing. You
    can only say how you, personally, react to it.

    >> I shot from another window and did
    >> not arrange the scene.

    >
    >Me niether, but when asking for a picture to be judged or commented on....
    >I can think of quite a bit to ramble on about regarding the SI.


    There are scenes that you can't arrange and scenes that can, and
    should, arrange. The photographs submitted to SI are not of scenes
    that we need to document the way a crime scene photographer documents
    what is there. If we want to re-position something in the scene
    before snapping, there's no reason not to.

    While it was not the case in the photograph I showed, had I been able
    to get into that room (which I wasn't) I see no ethical dilemma in
    moving those bottles around or adding bottles or changing the bottles.
    Like an artist applying brush to canvas, we're creating a scene that
    we think is interesting.

    In this image from 2008, I arranged the bottles before shooting. It's
    like painting a still life; no one expects the painter to find a
    pleasing arrangement sitting on a table in the right light.

    http://tonycooper.smugmug.com/Photography/Miscellanea/i-HNgrZk4/0/XL/2008-12-17-4-XL.jpg

    >> >I did find the window kept drawing me in as there was little else to look at it wasn;t meant as a critism it's just how I saw the picture.

    >>
    >> That's fine, and your impression is what I expect in a comment. The
    >> image was shot and processed in such a way to draw the eye to the
    >> window. If I wanted to reveal the items on the workbench, I would
    >> have used flash or increased the exposure in RAW. The specific actual
    >> items are, in my opinion, incidental to the scene.

    >
    >if it's the scene you are recording them expect people to notice what's in or not in the scene.
    >One of teh biggest problems and issues my father had wass when taking pictures of cottages
    >adn old building in country setting, it was teh TV areial and later sat. dishes, judge always
    >commented about TV areals spoling his pictures but what was he meant to do about it?.
    >rememer this was mid 70s before digital editing.


    >But these 'faults' were enough to mark the picture down as far as how good it was compitition wise.


    I enter images every month in one of my camera club's competition.
    Sometimes a judge will point out a "fault" that I included as a
    feature. The judge will say that one side should have been cropped
    out when I left that side in because I thought it added balance. The
    judge will say that the image should have been shot wider when I shot
    tight because I thought what was in there was what was important.

    I don't let those comments bother me. Those are the judge's reactions
    and a reflection of how that judge would have created the scene. I
    have no expectation that the judge will want the scene as I wanted the
    scene. I don't think he's right or that I'm right.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
    Tony Cooper, Jun 28, 2013
    #18
  19. Tony Cooper

    Tony Cooper Guest

    On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 06:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
    <> wrote:

    >> Thank you. If you don't use a program that allows you to set your
    >>
    >> line length at 72 characters, then manually insert breaks. It will be
    >>
    >> appreciated.

    >
    >Trouble is I see your post as double line spaced mine looks great[1]
    >
    >How do you set line lenghts ?


    I don't know. I know that I set my line length in my newsreader
    (Forte Agent) and that there's a option in "tools" where I do this. I
    don't know what newsreader you use or how it can (or if it can) be
    done in that.
    >Again all my lines are single spaced, my lines wrap corectly but don't add extra ">" when the line breaks, whereas yours appear to give a line feed and carragige return at the end of each line, which results in double spacing.


    Your posts are double spaced and long lines as I see them. I deleted
    the spaces and broke the lines in my other post just to make it easier
    to read.

    Unless you have an option in the newsreader to set the line length,
    the only thing you can do is hit the "return" to create a line break.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando FL
    Tony Cooper, Jun 28, 2013
    #19
  20. Tony Cooper

    Whisky-dave Guest

    On Friday, 28 June 2013 15:13:50 UTC+1, Tony Cooper wrote:
    > On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 06:11:35 -0700 (PDT), Whisky-dave
    >
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > >> Thank you. If you don't use a program that allows you to set your

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> line length at 72 characters, then manually insert breaks. It will be

    >
    > >>

    >
    > >> appreciated.

    >
    > >

    >
    > >Trouble is I see your post as double line spaced mine looks great[1]

    >
    > >

    >
    > >How do you set line lenghts ?

    >
    >
    >
    > I don't know. I know that I set my line length in my newsreader
    >
    > (Forte Agent) and that there's a option in "tools" where I do this.


    I'm using google mail and google groups.


    My options apprear to be
    Setting:-
    Display density
    Auto
    Cosy
    comfortable
    compact

    I'm on auto.





    I
    >
    > don't know what newsreader you use or how it can (or if it can) be
    >
    > done in that.
    >
    > >Again all my lines are single spaced, my lines wrap corectly but don't add extra ">" when the line breaks, whereas yours appear to give a line feed and carragige return at the end of each line, which results in double spacing.



    > Your posts are double spaced and long lines as I see them. I deleted
    >
    > the spaces and broke the lines in my other post just to make it easier
    >
    > to read.


    So you're having problems with your newsreader too ?


    > Unless you have an option in the newsreader to set the line length,
    >
    > the only thing you can do is hit the "return" to create a line break.


    The above was in two lines.
    I have deleted the extra blank line.


    After typing the line above after I hit the (Period) I hit carraige return


    The above was in two lines, second line ?.

    Above I deleted the period replacede it with a comma carried on typing
    on the same line, only doing a CR at the end.
    Whisky-dave, Jun 28, 2013
    #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.

Share This Page