Remember people who forced you to watch their slide shows?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, May 19, 2012.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    I was standing in-line at Starbucks and a guy with an iPad looked at
    my camera and said, "film camera, isn't it?" Olympus did their job
    right, since it was the OM-D. Anyway, turns out the guy owns a Canon
    5D-II and we discussed the lenses, etc. Then he decides to show me
    his images on his iPad. I cringed a bit thinking I was going to be
    exposed to some horrific dog and kid shots. But, the guy's images
    were outstanding. Shots in major national parks, in Utah and around
    the U.S. Easily pro grade. Apart from a couple garish HRD shots, a
    really impressive grouping.
    So, it goes to show, you never can tell what you might see from
    someone.
    RichA, May 19, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    On 5/19/2012 12:44 PM, George Kerby wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > On 5/19/12 11:27 AM, in article
    > , "RichA"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> I was standing in-line at Starbucks and a guy with an iPad looked at
    >> my camera and said, "film camera, isn't it?" Olympus did their job
    >> right, since it was the OM-D. Anyway, turns out the guy owns a Canon
    >> 5D-II and we discussed the lenses, etc. Then he decides to show me
    >> his images on his iPad. I cringed a bit thinking I was going to be
    >> exposed to some horrific dog and kid shots. But, the guy's images
    >> were outstanding. Shots in major national parks, in Utah and around
    >> the U.S. Easily pro grade. Apart from a couple garish HRD shots, a
    >> really impressive grouping.
    >> So, it goes to show, you never can tell what you might see from
    >> someone.

    >
    > So, is hell freezing over? Rich has something NICE to say about Apple? LOL!
    >


    Maybe he will learn to overcome his prejudices. Or, was it really Rich
    posting?

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, May 19, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On May 19, 3:39 pm, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    > On 2012-05-19 09:44:42 -0700, George Kerby <> said:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > On 5/19/12 11:27 AM, in article
    > > , "RichA"
    > > <> wrote:

    >
    > >> I was standing in-line at Starbucks and a guy with an iPad looked at
    > >> my camera and said, "film camera, isn't it?"  Olympus did their job
    > >> right, since it was the OM-D.  Anyway, turns out the guy owns a Canon
    > >> 5D-II and we discussed the lenses, etc.  Then he decides to show me
    > >> his images on his iPad.  I cringed a bit thinking I was going to be
    > >> exposed to some horrific dog and kid shots.  But, the guy's images
    > >> were outstanding.  Shots in major national parks, in Utah and around
    > >> the U.S.  Easily pro grade.  Apart from a couple garish HRD shots,a
    > >> really impressive grouping.
    > >> So, it goes to show, you never can tell what you might see from
    > >> someone.

    >
    > > So, is hell freezing over? Rich has something NICE to say about Apple? LOL!

    >
    > No!
    > Rich has never had anything nice to say about Apple. He had something
    > nice to say about the work of a Canon shooter, shown to him on an Apple
    > product.
    > That said, slide shows and portfolios are very well presented on an
    > iPad. For that alone it can be a useful tool for some photographers.
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Savageduck


    It's merely a display product, like those old portable storage units
    you could buy, with LCD screens.
    RichA, May 19, 2012
    #3
  4. RichA

    Trevor Guest


    > I was standing in-line at Starbucks and a guy with an iPad looked at
    > my camera and said, "film camera, isn't it?" Olympus did their job
    > right, since it was the OM-D. Anyway, turns out the guy owns a Canon
    > 5D-II and we discussed the lenses, etc. Then he decides to show me
    > his images on his iPad. I cringed a bit thinking I was going to be
    > exposed to some horrific dog and kid shots. But, the guy's images
    > were outstanding. Shots in major national parks, in Utah and around
    > the U.S. Easily pro grade. Apart from a couple garish HRD shots, a
    > really impressive grouping.
    > So, it goes to show, you never can tell what you might see from
    > someone.


    And for the exact opposite experience, I went to a talk given by a local
    "pro" who works on the local newspaper, and taught at the local college etc.
    His talk was the worst cringe worthy experince I have ever seen of hundreds
    of very poor holiday "snaps", kids etc. Many people left before it was over,
    and I left feeling sorry for any students who had the misfortune to take his
    classes. At least it was a free lecture, or I would have demanded my money
    back!

    BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and storage space!
    :)

    Trevor.
    Trevor, May 20, 2012
    #4
  5. "RichA" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    []
    > It's merely a display product, like those old portable storage units
    > you could buy, with LCD screens.


    You really should use one for a while before posting such nonsense about
    the iPad3. For a start, none of those older units have a 3 Mpix display
    ... and I don't think they have maps, GPS, voice recognition, web browsing
    etc. etc.

    David
    David J Taylor, May 20, 2012
    #5
  6. RichA

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Rich
    <> wrote:

    > >> It's merely a display product, like those old portable storage units
    > >> you could buy, with LCD screens.

    > >
    > > Would you say the same of an Android tablet?

    >
    > I know people try to justify their existence, but they really are toys.
    > The commpetition to see how many apps can be loaded and quickly forgotten
    > is fierce. I see people doing real work, I see laptops, consistently.


    you really need to get out more.
    nospam, May 20, 2012
    #6
  7. "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
    news:2012051922560077633-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom...
    []
    > My iPad 2 runs iOS 5.1.1 the same OS as the new iPad. While the display
    > doesn't meet the specs of the "Retina" display on the new iPad 3, I have
    > no complaints with regard to the quality of the images I am able to
    > display. It is really tough to see the difference. The new iPad has a
    > better camera, and there the results are obvious.
    > ...but I hardly ever use the iPad camera, I do use the iPhone camera
    > from time to time, and it isn't bad as a spur of the moment shooter.
    > Where it shines is using Ricoh's Scan Pages app to shoot documents save
    > them as editable PDFs and share them with all my devices via Evernote.


    I tend to view the display quite closely, and I find the improved text
    clarity makes reading noticeably easier on the eye. I was surprised by
    the difference. You notice this particularly on maps where the text can
    be quite small.

    > As for GPS that works just fine, as it does on the iPad 3 and iPhone. I
    > have a whole variety of maps and nav aids. Let's see, I currently can
    > choose from Google Earth, MapQuest, NatGeo Park Maps, Park Guides,
    > Galileo for loading offline maps, along with MotionX-GPS, Spyglass,
    > 3GPS, CoPilot GPS, and Theodolite.


    I've just bought MapsWithMe:

    http://www.mapswithme.com/

    as the maps are free, and include regions which I will need (Svalbard).
    There's a free version of the program as well, which just lacks the search
    capability.

    > The big caveat is the Wi-Fi only iPads do not have GPS capability.


    Yes, that is an annoyance. Camera images are geo-tagged with the GPS
    data, which can be helpful.

    > Most of the Apps have been updated to provide improved presentation on
    > the new iPad, and the iPad 2 has reaped the benefit.
    > Along with all that I have access to Skype, Sirius/XM Satellite,
    > Pandora, Tunein Radio, NetFlix Streaming, & HBO GO on my Macs, iPhone, &
    > iPad.


    Yes, I've used Skype and it works very well on the iPad. The BBC News,
    BBC iPlayer, and Twitter are probably my most-used programs. I have
    converted some movied from DVD to iPad as well, using HandBrake.

    > ...and reading on the iPad is not a wholly unpleasant experience. I am
    > currently engrossed with Alan Furst's "The Book of Spies", a compilation
    > of some classic works by Ambler, Conrad, Le Carre, Burgess, Greene,
    > Maugham, & a few others.


    My reading is more technical manuals, but I have downloaded a few books.
    I find that when working on the PC, it's handy to have the document
    available on a second screen, and it means I can take my manuals for most
    on my kit away with me at no extra weight penalty. I tend to use DropBox
    and PDFs for that, although I have SkyDrive as well. At least with
    DropBox I can keep copies on multiple PCs at home, and not /have/ to rely
    on the cloud.

    > For file transfer I have specific apps for Dropbox, Pogoplug, Picasa,
    > and the Photo Transfer App with which I can send or receive apps between
    > other mobile devices or computers. All pretty neat stuff.
    > This is also available for Android devices.
    > < http://www.phototransferapp.com/ipad/ >
    >
    > ...I can also bore the socks off of unsuspecting individuals by
    > torturing them with endless slideshows which I can suck out of
    > cyber-space.
    >
    > --
    > Regards,
    >
    > Savageduck


    Did you find that iOS 5 allowed ordering of images in a slide-show? I
    recall we talked about this some time back. If it's in the Photo app, I
    have yet to find it.

    I must say that the iPad has been one of my best purchases, and has given
    me a lot of fun. It's so much more convenient than any other computing
    device I have, and I do use it quite a lot. I do wish there was a way of
    running software on a trial basis, though. The Photo transfer App looks
    interesting, and if it's useful to me I would willingly buy it, but I
    don't want to fork out money and then have to argue over a refund. That
    was a good feature of MapsWithMe - there is a "lite" version and using
    that for a couple of days was enough to convince me to buy.

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, May 20, 2012
    #7
  8. I should add that the other applications which I have found surprisingly
    useful have been augmented reality ones - Ship Finder RA and Plane Finder
    AR:

    http://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/ship-finder-ar/id351104359?mt=8

    http://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/plane-finder-ar/id390039844?mt=8

    (and there's a free version of Plane Finder). These use the camera and
    display to show you the scene in front of your eyes with labels
    superimposed of the ship names or aircraft names and routes. I can
    imagine using something like this as a sort of virtual tourist device for
    when you are looking out over a new city, wanting to see the landmarks.
    It sounds corny when explained in text, but different when you try it in
    practice....

    Cheers,
    David
    David J Taylor, May 20, 2012
    #8
  9. RichA

    Mike Guest

    On 19/05/2012 12:44 PM, George Kerby wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > On 5/19/12 11:27 AM, in article
    > , "RichA"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> I was standing in-line at Starbucks and a guy with an iPad looked at
    >> my camera and said, "film camera, isn't it?" Olympus did their job
    >> right, since it was the OM-D. Anyway, turns out the guy owns a Canon
    >> 5D-II and we discussed the lenses, etc. Then he decides to show me
    >> his images on his iPad. I cringed a bit thinking I was going to be
    >> exposed to some horrific dog and kid shots. But, the guy's images
    >> were outstanding. Shots in major national parks, in Utah and around
    >> the U.S. Easily pro grade. Apart from a couple garish HRD shots, a
    >> really impressive grouping.
    >> So, it goes to show, you never can tell what you might see from
    >> someone.

    >
    > So, is hell freezing over? Rich has something NICE to say about Apple? LOL!
    >

    And about Canon too, in the same post.

    --
    Mike
    Mike, May 20, 2012
    #9
  10. Trevor <> wrote:

    > BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and storage space!
    > :)


    And that's bad because?

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 21, 2012
    #10
  11. Rich <> wrote:
    > N <> wrote in
    >> RichA wrote on 20/05/2012 :


    iPad.

    >>> It's merely a display product, like those old portable storage units
    >>> you could buy, with LCD screens.


    Yep, and a camera is merely a bad light detector, like those
    optical cells they used to trigger flashes.


    >> Would you say the same of an Android tablet?


    > I know people try to justify their existence, but they really are toys.
    > The commpetition to see how many apps can be loaded and quickly forgotten
    > is fierce. I see people doing real work, I see laptops, consistently.


    Laptops are toys.
    Otherwise there wouldn't be any with a glare display.

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 21, 2012
    #11
  12. RichA

    RichA Guest

    On May 20, 9:17 pm, Wolfgang Weisselberg <>
    wrote:
    > Rich <> wrote:
    > > N <> wrote in
    > >> RichA wrote on 20/05/2012 :

    >
    > iPad.
    >
    > >>> It's merely a display product, like those old portable storage units
    > >>> you could buy, with LCD screens.

    >
    > Yep, and a camera is merely a bad light detector, like those
    > optical cells they used to trigger flashes.
    >
    > >> Would you say the same of an Android tablet?

    > > I know people try to justify their existence, but they really are toys.
    > > The commpetition to see how many apps can be loaded and quickly forgotten
    > > is fierce.   I see people doing real work, I see laptops, consistently.

    >
    > Laptops are toys.
    > Otherwise there wouldn't be any with a glare display.
    >
    > -Wolfgang


    What?
    RichA, May 21, 2012
    #12
  13. RichA

    Trevor Guest

    "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > Trevor <> wrote:
    >> BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and storage space!
    >> :)

    >
    > And that's bad because?


    I wondered if he threw away his negatives as well to save storage space. :)
    (I told him there was a RAW + JPG option if he needed to save time, and
    storage space was rather a non issue for most people these days)

    And it's really bad because he told the audience there was no point in
    shooting RAW, and he didn't understand the loss of dynamic range being saved
    which gives no chance to make satisfactory changes later. He said the only
    difference was a very small loss in detail. For someone who taught
    photography, the least he could have done is mention that his option may
    suit newspaper photo's, but not art photography. But he obviously had no
    idea. Of course he had no idea what "unsharp mask" meant either, and his
    photo's proved the real extent of his other limitations.

    Trevor.
    Trevor, May 21, 2012
    #13
  14. Trevor <> wrote:

    > "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    >> Trevor <> wrote:
    >>> BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and storage space!
    >>> :)


    >> And that's bad because?


    > I wondered if he threw away his negatives as well to save storage space. :)


    Not comparable. But maybe he shot polaroid.

    > (I told him there was a RAW + JPG option if he needed to save time, and
    > storage space was rather a non issue for most people these days)


    Once you understand
    "most people" != "all people"
    your amount of photos != everyones amount of photos
    10 TB != large
    you'll be better off.

    > And it's really bad because he told the audience there was no point in
    > shooting RAW,


    For quite a lot of things there isn't.

    > and he didn't understand the loss of dynamic range being saved
    > which gives no chance to make satisfactory changes later.


    You're supposed to photograph, not to photoshop.

    > He said the only
    > difference was a very small loss in detail.


    And he's right.

    > For someone who taught
    > photography, the least he could have done is mention that his option may
    > suit newspaper photo's, but not art photography.


    You have got a strange idea of art. And of newspaper photos.
    And the relation between these two. Lots of prejudice or no
    thinking.

    > But he obviously had no
    > idea. Of course he had no idea what "unsharp mask" meant either, and his
    > photo's proved the real extent of his other limitations.


    Ah, yes, you're the one who'd judge the content of photos or
    art only on their technical merit. Anyone who doesn't know
    "unsharp mask" doesn't know anything. What do you know about
    "artistic vision"?

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 22, 2012
    #14
  15. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Mon, 21 May 2012 13:18:56 +1000, "Trevor" <> wrote:
    :
    : "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <> wrote in message
    : news:p...
    : > Trevor <> wrote:
    : >> BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and storage space!
    : >> :)
    : >
    : > And that's bad because?
    :
    : I wondered if he threw away his negatives as well to save storage space. :)
    : (I told him there was a RAW + JPG option if he needed to save time, and
    : storage space was rather a non issue for most people these days)
    :
    : And it's really bad because he told the audience there was no point in
    : shooting RAW, and he didn't understand the loss of dynamic range being
    : saved which gives no chance to make satisfactory changes later. He said
    : the only difference was a very small loss in detail. For someone who
    : taught photography, the least he could have done is mention that his
    : option may suit newspaper photo's, but not art photography. But he
    : obviously had no idea. Of course he had no idea what "unsharp mask" meant
    : either, and his photo's proved the real extent of his other limitations.

    I can muster a bit of sympathy for what it must be like to be a newspaper
    photographer, with the constant deadline pressure and crappy reproduction of
    one's photos. When I shoot an event (always in RAW), the first thing I usually
    have to do is convert a few images to JPEG and make them available to our
    local newspapers. That can be a bit of a nuisance, especially if the event
    ends late at night. But I cover an event every couple of weeks, on average,
    which is nothing like doing several a day with even greater deadline pressure.
    So I can understand the temptation of relegating everything to quick and dirty
    procedures, eschewing such niceties as RAW mode and unsharp masks, as long as
    the editor doesn't give me a hard time.

    Come to think of it, do we have any newspaper photographers (active or
    retired) in the group? I can't recall anyone mentioning having been one.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, May 26, 2012
    #15
  16. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 26 May 2012 13:59:44 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : On 2012-05-26 12:47:00 -0700, Robert Coe <> said:
    :
    : > On Mon, 21 May 2012 13:18:56 +1000, "Trevor" <> wrote:
    : > :
    : > : "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <> wrote in message
    : > : news:p...
    : > : > Trevor <> wrote:
    : > : >> BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and storage space!
    : > : >> :)
    : > : >
    : > : > And that's bad because?
    : > :
    : > : I wondered if he threw away his negatives as well to save storage space. :)
    : > : (I told him there was a RAW + JPG option if he needed to save time, and
    : > : storage space was rather a non issue for most people these days)
    : > :
    : > : And it's really bad because he told the audience there was no point in
    : > : shooting RAW, and he didn't understand the loss of dynamic range being
    : > : saved which gives no chance to make satisfactory changes later. He said
    : > : the only difference was a very small loss in detail. For someone who
    : > : taught photography, the least he could have done is mention that his
    : > : option may suit newspaper photo's, but not art photography. But he
    : > : obviously had no idea. Of course he had no idea what "unsharp mask" meant
    : > : either, and his photo's proved the real extent of his other limitations.
    : >
    : > I can muster a bit of sympathy for what it must be like to be a newspaper
    : > photographer, with the constant deadline pressure and crappy reproduction of
    : > one's photos. When I shoot an event (always in RAW), the first thing I usually
    : > have to do is convert a few images to JPEG and make them available to our
    : > local newspapers. That can be a bit of a nuisance, especially if the event
    : > ends late at night. But I cover an event every couple of weeks, on average,
    : > which is nothing like doing several a day with even greater deadline pressure.
    : > So I can understand the temptation of relegating everything to quick and dirty
    : > procedures, eschewing such niceties as RAW mode and unsharp masks, as long as
    : > the editor doesn't give me a hard time.
    : >
    : > Come to think of it, do we have any newspaper photographers (active or
    : > retired) in the group? I can't recall anyone mentioning having been one.
    : >
    : > Bob
    :
    : Then why not shoot RAW + JPEG?
    : ...and since you have the full RAW file it isn't even necessary to have
    : the JPEG at full size, or compression. A newspaper is going to be
    : printing halftones anyway, so image quality is not one of their great
    : priorities. As has been stated in this thread, shooting RAW+JPEG is not
    : too much of a penalty memory-wise.

    In my case, the answer is that I'm not that good. The pictures I produce
    always seem to need cropping, white balance adjustment, brightness tuning,
    etc. And I can make those fixes more effectively in RAW than in JPEG.

    I'm not particularly concerned about memory. I work for our Information
    Technology Department. I can get as big a computer, and as much disk space on
    our servers, as I need. In my cameras I use 16GB CF cards, and I can't
    remember the last time I had to change cards during a shoot. (At events I
    almost always use two cameras, so I have a capacity of about 1000 shots.)

    Bob
    Robert Coe, May 26, 2012
    #16
  17. On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:12:32 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    <> wrote:

    >Ah, yes, you're the one who'd judge the content of photos or
    >art only on their technical merit. Anyone who doesn't know
    >"unsharp mask" doesn't know anything. What do you know about
    >"artistic vision"?


    Hey, a shit slideshow is a shit slideshow. Simple as that.
    Grimly Curmudgeon, May 27, 2012
    #17
  18. RichA

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 26 May 2012 15:09:52 -0700, Savageduck
    <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : On 2012-05-26 14:29:41 -0700, Robert Coe <> said:
    :
    : > On Sat, 26 May 2012 13:59:44 -0700, Savageduck
    : > <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
    : > : On 2012-05-26 12:47:00 -0700, Robert Coe <> said:
    : > :
    : > : > On Mon, 21 May 2012 13:18:56 +1000, "Trevor" <> wrote:
    : > : > :
    : > : > : "Wolfgang Weisselberg" <> wrote in message
    : > : > : news:p...
    : > : > : > Trevor <> wrote:
    : > : > : >> BTW he always shoots in jpg only on a 5D2 to save time and
    : > storage space!
    : > : > : >> :)
    : > : > : >
    : > : > : > And that's bad because?
    : > : > :
    : > : > : I wondered if he threw away his negatives as well to save storage
    : > space. :)
    : > : > : (I told him there was a RAW + JPG option if he needed to save time, and
    : > : > : storage space was rather a non issue for most people these days)
    : > : > :
    : > : > : And it's really bad because he told the audience there was no point in
    : > : > : shooting RAW, and he didn't understand the loss of dynamic range being
    : > : > : saved which gives no chance to make satisfactory changes later. He said
    : > : > : the only difference was a very small loss in detail. For someone who
    : > : > : taught photography, the least he could have done is mention that his
    : > : > : option may suit newspaper photo's, but not art photography. But he
    : > : > : obviously had no idea. Of course he had no idea what "unsharp mask" meant
    : > : > : either, and his photo's proved the real extent of his other limitations.
    : > : >
    : > : > I can muster a bit of sympathy for what it must be like to be a newspaper
    : > : > photographer, with the constant deadline pressure and crappy
    : > reproduction of
    : > : > one's photos. When I shoot an event (always in RAW), the first
    : > thing I usually
    : > : > have to do is convert a few images to JPEG and make them available to our
    : > : > local newspapers. That can be a bit of a nuisance, especially if the event
    : > : > ends late at night. But I cover an event every couple of weeks, on average,
    : > : > which is nothing like doing several a day with even greater
    : > deadline pressure.
    : > : > So I can understand the temptation of relegating everything to
    : > quick and dirty
    : > : > procedures, eschewing such niceties as RAW mode and unsharp masks,
    : > as long as
    : > : > the editor doesn't give me a hard time.
    : > : >
    : > : > Come to think of it, do we have any newspaper photographers (active or
    : > : > retired) in the group? I can't recall anyone mentioning having been one.
    : > : >
    : > : > Bob
    : > :
    : > : Then why not shoot RAW + JPEG?
    : > : ...and since you have the full RAW file it isn't even necessary to have
    : > : the JPEG at full size, or compression. A newspaper is going to be
    : > : printing halftones anyway, so image quality is not one of their great
    : > : priorities. As has been stated in this thread, shooting RAW+JPEG is not
    : > : too much of a penalty memory-wise.
    : >
    : > In my case, the answer is that I'm not that good. The pictures I produce
    : > always seem to need cropping, white balance adjustment, brightness tuning,
    : > etc. And I can make those fixes more effectively in RAW than in JPEG.
    :
    : So? Neither am I.
    : Shoot WB auto, don't bother with cropping other than to standard sizes
    : required by the newspaper. If the brightness/contrast isn't to your
    : liking out of the camera, just hit it with "auto contrast" & "Auto
    : tone". In most cases you shouldn't even have to bother with that. Your
    : standard of perfection isn't required in a World where newspapers are
    : happy to use unprocessed camera phone images.
    :
    : Shooting for yourself and /or a client who cares about image quality
    : and composition is one thing, one where tweaking a RAW file is
    : preferred. That is my usual practice. However submitting a jpeg capture
    : to a newspaper, where the photo editor is probably going to make
    : his/her crops to fit, is a quick and dirty affair not worth exerting
    : the same post effort as you would for your RAW files. (see note on
    : camera phone images)
    :
    : Newspaper images are not client PR, or magazine shots, or fine art.
    : Hell! For the most part they aren't even worthy of online publication.

    I see your point, and there's a lot of evidence to support what you say. But I
    have the good fortune to find myself, as much by dumb luck as by demonstrated
    skill, in a situation where photography is a significant part of my day job.
    If I screw it up, it isn't going to be because I ever deliberately produced
    less than my best work.

    Bob
    Robert Coe, May 27, 2012
    #18
  19. RichA

    Trevor Guest

    "Robert Coe" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >In my cameras I use 16GB CF cards, and I can't
    > remember the last time I had to change cards during a shoot.


    I can, it was back when 1GB CF cards were still considered big, and
    expensive :-(
    Besides multiple cards I had a hard drive backup device I no longer use.

    Trevor.
    Trevor, May 28, 2012
    #19
  20. Grimly Curmudgeon <> wrote:
    > On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:12:32 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
    > <> wrote:


    >>Ah, yes, you're the one who'd judge the content of photos or
    >>art only on their technical merit. Anyone who doesn't know
    >>"unsharp mask" doesn't know anything. What do you know about
    >>"artistic vision"?


    > Hey, a shit slideshow is a shit slideshow. Simple as that.


    You used an 's' word. That means what you say is completely
    wrong and only shows your stupidity.

    Don't like that? Funny, that's the way you rate content ...

    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, May 28, 2012
    #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. Invalid Address

    Forced video AND forced audio from Universal

    Invalid Address, Jan 8, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    32
    Views:
    2,168
    John Savard
    Jan 18, 2004
  2. DeMoN LaG
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    414
    DeMoN LaG
    Nov 17, 2003
  3. Eljee
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    411
    ½ Confused
    Sep 21, 2006
  4. thingy
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    304
  5. Meat Plow
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    552
    chuckcar
    Sep 20, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page