rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Every thread even close to the subject has carried extra baggage. If that is your interest, don't talk about anything else - because people will major on the minors - just post a two line question about needed resolution.

Added: never mind - I have posted a two line question over there.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Sometimes digression is a good thing. It fills in the missing pieces. It allows anyone to ask for more information or clarification on any point posted by anyone else.

That's an advantage in the Main Photography Discussion. Anyone can ask for clarification. In the new section, only mentors and the OP can do that.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

This often clarifies things for those who can put aside their preconceived notions and wrap their heads around the logic.

http://www.photokaboom.com/photography/learn/printing/resolution/1_which_resolution_print_size_viewing_distance.htm

You are 100% on target saying or implying that image resolution, in ppi, is less important as you increase the viewing distance. This article has a couple of references that include measurements and calculations as to why this is the case. This only works for people, not for birds of prey, who tend to have better eyesight.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Odd that you would have posted that question there when it was already answered here.

You might get dinged for asking a question to which you already know the answer.

You might remember The Car Guys segment call Stump the Chumps.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

I'm having my cataracts fixed in April.

I'm not an eagle, never even been to Philadelphia.

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

Some things came to my mind as I read Rongnongno's post about the original thread in "Advice From Pros" and then the original post. The first was that there was some animosity between the Rongnongno and TheDman. It did get me to read the TheDman's post though.

The second thing that I realized after reading TheDman's post was that he was "testing" the restraint of the Mentors in a way. Some seemed to know better than to answer the question as it was not their area of expertise. And others took the bait. And one Mentor knew it was bait and answered it correctly.

I am not immune to the "need to be helpful" and have provided answers to some questions on UHH thinking I knew the answer and later realizing that I had provided an incomplete answer - which can be as bad as a totally wrong answer. (And thank you Gene for providing the full answer on the use and usefulness of the X-Rite ColorChecker Passport. Another aha moment was provided as I had originally skimmed the manual and had thought that WhiteBalance was "cooked" into the camera profile created. "My Bad" as the youngsters say.)

But my take-away was that perhaps the Mentors should NOT provide an answer when they do not know the answer. Had that been the modus operandi of the section then there would have been no blood spilled. If I remember correctly, part of the reason for this new section was to have helpful, concise and correct answers to the posed questions that could be used as a resource for UHH users. If all of the Mentors provide answers and the answers contradict each other then we will be in the same situation we are in on the other sections where members (like me) who hope to be helpful fail and the UHH user is forced to sort through the different offerings and somehow determine who is "correct" or "least incorrect".

But at some point it would be nice to have a synopsis of the Mentors' answers provided in the threads so that we are not forced to wade through the contradictory answers (though admittedly I do enjoy the Peyton Place type interactions sometimes occurring here on UHH). I am very much hoping the new "Advice From The Pros" section does succeed. And thank you to the Mentors and Rongnongno for your efforts.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

Your observations are spot on. The mentors did not misbehave.

However, some of their responses (in that thread as well as in a couple of others) were unnecessary and should not have been posted.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

In the Ask he Experts forum I will refrain from providing a contradictory answer. The level of most of the respondents is quite thorough and accurate, so there is no need. If the question lends itself to interpretation, or if as can be often the case, there is more than one way to do something, and posting the alternate adds to the conversation without being dismissive of the original response, I may choose to include my opinion and/or practice. If I cannot provide an answer with first hand information, backed up by a good source or two, I won't respond. I can't speak for the others, but that is how I intend to proceed. If you want noise, or you want to hear what you want to hear, or get bad information all mixed in with strong, solid advice, or just want a bit of entertainment to break up the afternoon, then there is the General Section.

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

As I composed my very long dissertation I was also thinking of how this issue could be avoided. All of the thoughts that came to my mind would require a much longer process in getting to a single answer. That is why I mentioned the idea of a synopsis at the end of the process. {And like I said, I do enjoy the PROCESS. It is much less severe than actual violence.}

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

I find it interesting that someone that I think is somewhat of a troll in a way, not sure of the exact and specific meaning of the word, but someone that I find almost gruffly overbearing and wanting to control the entire site is the monitor of this new site. Good luck with that.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

A troll in more ways than one, no matter how you define troll.

In nearly five years he has probably fought with and insulted more people than anyone who has not already been banned from UHH.

He is also a serial abuser of the Ignore button. In the new section section every member of UHH (other than mentors and monitors) is effectively on the Ignore list for any thread started by anyone else. It's a concept that seems natural to him.

You have to wonder what Admin was thinking giving him control over three separate sections.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

HarryBinNC Loc: Blue Ridge Mtns, No.Carolina, USA

Erm, to pick a rather large nit - you state in the second paragraph "A 6 mp image from a NIkon D70 is 6000x4000. At a desired print resolution of 300 ppi, you can print, without resampling, a 20x13.3 image" - which of course, is incorrect, as are all of the following math samples based on a D70. A 6000x4000 sensor contains 24 million pixels - the antique D70 produces only 3000x2000 pixel images. Maybe the camera reference should have been a D750 or D7100/7200?

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

(Download)