WHAT IN THE SAND HILL IS GOING ON HERE?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Annika1980, Jan 25, 2004.

  1. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Jan 25, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. David J. Littleboy, Jan 25, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. George Preddy, Jan 27, 2004
    #3
  4. Annika1980

    George Kerby Guest

    On 1/27/04 4:49 PM, in article bv6n8a$d93$, "George
    Preddy" <> wrote:

    >
    > "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Birdies galore !!!
    >>
    >> http://www.pbase.com/image/25424061

    >
    > Very nice 0.3 MP pic!
    >
    >

    Oh Hell. You're back.
    I thought you went to crap and the hogs ate you.
    Damn!


    _______________________________________________________________________________
    Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
    <><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
     
    George Kerby, Jan 27, 2004
    #4
  5. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    Annika1980, Jan 28, 2004
    #5
  6. Annika1980

    Jeff Shoaf Guest

    George Kerby <> wrote in
    news:BC3C4EBE.32A39%:

    > On 1/27/04 4:49 PM, in article bv6n8a$d93$, "George
    > Preddy" <> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Birdies galore !!!
    >>>
    >>> http://www.pbase.com/image/25424061

    >>
    >> Very nice 0.3 MP pic!
    >>
    >>

    > Oh Hell. You're back.
    > I thought you went to crap and the hogs ate you.
    > Damn!
    >
    >


    The hogs hurt themselves on all of his over-sharpened false edges...
     
    Jeff Shoaf, Jan 28, 2004
    #6
  7. "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >From: "George Preddy"

    >
    > >http://www.pbase.com/image/25424061
    > >
    > >Very nice 0.3 MP pic!

    >
    > Thanks. You should see the 6.3MP uninterpolated version!


    Did you take it with a 25MP digital back? Why not post it?
     
    George Preddy, Jan 28, 2004
    #7
  8. "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:bv6n8a$d93$...
    >
    > "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Birdies galore !!!
    > >
    > > http://www.pbase.com/image/25424061

    >
    > Very nice 0.3 MP pic!


    Aren't you going to post the original?

    How about posting 2 at original size? 1 with the normal Bayer digital
    sharpening bandaids applied, and 1 before any attempts to digitially savage
    the pic.
     
    George Preddy, Jan 28, 2004
    #8
  9. "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:bv7aea$3gs$...
    >
    > "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > >From: "George Preddy"

    > >
    > > >http://www.pbase.com/image/25424061
    > > >
    > > >Very nice 0.3 MP pic!

    > >
    > > Thanks. You should see the 6.3MP uninterpolated version!

    >
    > Did you take it with a 25MP digital back? Why not post it?


    Why, don't you like the image? Do you think wasting more bandwidth will make
    it a better composition?

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Jan 28, 2004
    #9
  10. "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote in message
    news:4018277e$0$327$4all.nl...
    >
    > "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    > news:bv7aea$3gs$...
    > >
    > > "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > >From: "George Preddy"
    > > >
    > > > >http://www.pbase.com/image/25424061
    > > > >
    > > > >Very nice 0.3 MP pic!
    > > >
    > > > Thanks. You should see the 6.3MP uninterpolated version!

    > >
    > > Did you take it with a 25MP digital back? Why not post it?

    >
    > Why, don't you like the image?


    I do, but at 0.3MP it isn't very useful.
     
    George Preddy, Jan 28, 2004
    #10
  11. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    >HERE?
    >From: "George Preddy"


    >> >Very nice 0.3 MP pic!

    >>
    >> Thanks. You should see the 6.3MP uninterpolated version!

    >
    >Did you take it with a 25MP digital back?


    No, I took it with a TRUE 6.3 MP camera!
    Not that yellow extrapolated crap that Sigma puts out.
     
    Annika1980, Jan 30, 2004
    #11
  12. Annika1980

    Annika1980 Guest

    >From: "George Preddy"

    >> Why, don't you like the image?

    >
    >I do, but at 0.3MP it isn't very useful.


    You saw the pic didn't you?
    That's all the use I wanted out of it.
    If I posted all my pics full-sized they'd be hanging on living rooms walls all
    over the world .... and I'd still be broke!
     
    Annika1980, Jan 30, 2004
    #12
  13. "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >From: "George Preddy"

    >
    > >> Why, don't you like the image?

    > >
    > >I do, but at 0.3MP it isn't very useful.

    >
    > You saw the pic didn't you?


    Yes, it was 0.3MP which is is obviously useless.

    > That's all the use I wanted out of it.
    > If I posted all my pics full-sized they'd be hanging on living rooms walls

    all
    > over the world .... and I'd still be broke!


    Unless you overlayed a "proof" watermark like every pro who isn't
    afraid/embarrased to share the quality their clients can expect. Post that
    one full size straight out of camera that way, lets have a look.
     
    George Preddy, Jan 31, 2004
    #13
  14. Annika1980

    Lionel Guest

    Re: WHAT IN THE SAND HILL IS GOING ON HERE? (Preddy kook)

    Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    that:

    >"Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> Birdies galore !!!
    >>
    >> http://www.pbase.com/image/25424061

    >
    >Very nice 0.3 MP pic!


    Um, George? - Has nobody explained to you yet that Pbase subscribers
    have limited amounts of storage available? The free trial accounts are
    limited to 10MB. Want to know how many full size 10D photos you can fit
    in that amount of space? - *Maybe* two photos.
    (Ref: <http://www.pbase.com/pricing.html>)
    Only someone as moronic (or obsessive) as you would waste an entire
    Pbase account on one or two photos. Mind you, if you have a low
    resolution camera like the SD9, the file sizes will be much smaller than
    that, so of course you can put plenty of full-size photos online - if
    you're clueless enough to think that it's smart to put full-res photos
    on a website in the first place, seeing as very few people will be
    running their browser on a 2000x3000+ pixel display.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Lionel, Jan 31, 2004
    #14
  15. Annika1980

    Lionel Guest

    Re: WHAT IN THE SAND HILL IS GOING ON HERE? (Preddy kook)

    Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    that:

    >
    >"Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote in message
    >news:4018277e$0$327$4all.nl...
    >>
    >> "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    >> news:bv7aea$3gs$...
    >> >
    >> > "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    >> > news:...
    >> > > >From: "George Preddy"
    >> > >
    >> > > >http://www.pbase.com/image/25424061
    >> > > >
    >> > > >Very nice 0.3 MP pic!
    >> > >
    >> > > Thanks. You should see the 6.3MP uninterpolated version!
    >> >
    >> > Did you take it with a 25MP digital back? Why not post it?

    >>
    >> Why, don't you like the image?

    >
    >I do, but at 0.3MP it isn't very useful.


    It's not meant to be 'useful' to /you/, George. If it's going to be
    'useful' to someone, that'll be Annika. I seriously doubt that he
    considers making it easy for people to rip off his images is 'useful' in
    any way.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Lionel, Jan 31, 2004
    #15
  16. Annika1980

    Lionel Guest

    Re: WHAT IN THE SAND HILL IS GOING ON HERE? (Preddy kook)

    Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    that:

    >"Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> >From: "George Preddy"

    >>
    >> >> Why, don't you like the image?
    >> >
    >> >I do, but at 0.3MP it isn't very useful.

    >>
    >> You saw the pic didn't you?

    >
    >Yes, it was 0.3MP which is is obviously useless.
    >
    >> That's all the use I wanted out of it.
    >> If I posted all my pics full-sized they'd be hanging on living rooms walls

    >all
    >> over the world .... and I'd still be broke!

    >
    >Unless you overlayed a "proof" watermark like every pro who isn't
    >afraid/embarrased to share the quality their clients can expect. Post that
    >one full size straight out of camera that way, lets have a look.


    If it's *that* important to you to have a full size version, I suggest
    that you offer to pay him for it. Photographers only go to the effort of
    watermarking & handing out full-size proof of photos when they have some
    expectation of being paid for the real thing.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Lionel, Jan 31, 2004
    #16
  17. Annika1980

    Lionel Guest

    Re: WHAT IN THE SAND HILL IS GOING ON HERE? (Preddy kook)

    Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    that:

    >
    >"George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    >news:bv6n8a$d93$...
    >>
    >> "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > Birdies galore !!!
    >> >
    >> > http://www.pbase.com/image/25424061

    >>
    >> Very nice 0.3 MP pic!

    >
    >Aren't you going to post the original?
    >
    >How about posting 2 at original size? 1 with the normal Bayer digital
    >sharpening bandaids applied, and 1 before any attempts to digitially savage
    >the pic.


    When are *you* going to post an SD9 or 10 image that hasn't been
    artifically sharpened by the Foveon hardware/software? I haven't yet
    seen you point out a Foveon image that doesn't have sharpening halos
    around the fine detail.

    --
    W
    . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
    \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
    ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
     
    Lionel, Jan 31, 2004
    #17
  18. Re: WHAT IN THE SAND HILL IS GOING ON HERE? (Preddy kook)

    "Lionel" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >Unless you overlayed a "proof" watermark like every pro who isn't
    > >afraid/embarrased to share the quality their clients can expect. Post

    that
    > >one full size straight out of camera that way, lets have a look.

    >
    > If it's *that* important to you to have a full size version, I suggest
    > that you offer to pay him for it.


    Pay him to see that his camera produces nothing but junk at 6M interpolated
    recorded output pixels? No thanks.
     
    George Preddy, Jan 31, 2004
    #18
  19. 0.3MP Canon DSLR images (Re: WHAT IN THE SAND HILL IS GOING ON HERE?)

    "Lionel" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:...
    > Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    > that:
    > >> Why, don't you like the image?

    > >
    > >I do, but at 0.3MP it isn't very useful.

    >
    > It's not meant to be 'useful' to /you/, George.


    0.3MP is useless to anyone.
     
    George Preddy, Jan 31, 2004
    #19
  20. Re: WHAT IN THE SAND HILL IS GOING ON HERE? (Preddy kook)

    "Lionel" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Kibo informs me that "George Preddy" <> stated
    > that:
    >
    > >"Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    > >news:...
    > >> Birdies galore !!!
    > >>
    > >> http://www.pbase.com/image/25424061

    > >
    > >Very nice 0.3 MP pic!

    >
    > Um, George? - Has nobody explained to you yet that Pbase subscribers
    > have limited amounts of storage available? The free trial accounts are
    > limited to 10MB. Want to know how many full size 10D photos you can fit
    > in that amount of space? - *Maybe* two photos.


    Name: Bret Douglas (joined 01-Apr-2002) (pbase supporter)

    Next excuse?

    The fact is that massive downsizing is required for this image (and it's
    still slighty blurry). Everything you whine about short of him simply
    posting a professional quality 6MP proof as it came out of camera, simply
    reinforces the fact that the 10D is a very blurry 1.5 full color MP
    DSLR--best case.

    A $620 10.3MP SD9 wouldn't have ruined that fine effort, it would be sharp
    as a tack full size.
     
    George Preddy, Jan 31, 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. Ratt Atttat Dat

    Flyfishing in the sand

    Ratt Atttat Dat, Dec 24, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    439
  2. Lionel
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    332
    Azzz1588
    Jan 22, 2004
  3. Doug MacLean
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    463
    Doug MacLean
    Feb 3, 2004
  4. Al

    Minolta Z1, rolled in beach sand

    Al, Aug 17, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    299
    David Chien
    Aug 23, 2005
  5. Collector»NZ
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    991
    JohnO
    Mar 12, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page