Golden Rule wrote:
This is Will, a nine month old Lhasa Apso. We got him 3 weeks ago and he made his Easter debut. He is desperate for a grooming and we are on the search!
You are a superb dog photographer, and/or Will is a superb canine model. Our wonderful Carin Terrier looks away as soon as I raise a camera or a phone.
Aloysius wrote:
Im looking for something that’s a bit more upscale than Flickr—any thoughts?
I imagine I'm just being dense - yet again - but in what way "more upscale" than Flickr? More expensive? Fancier website? Fewer low income users? Fewer images that seem unappealing?
Wow! As he said, brief but spectacular!
Well, I'd say I'd be happy for you to stop obsessing over two pendulums - as soon as you get into three.
They're really fascinating!
Linda From Maine wrote:
Oops
I replaced that pic and rewrote the opening 30 or 40 minutes before you commented. Crazy is as crazy does
Soo, I musta seen the unedited version?
Linda From Maine wrote:
Sam, did you happen to see this thread when I first posted an edited version of #3? I decided I liked the unedited better
Your time is much appreciated!
So, you're just trying to make crazier than I already am?
I'm guessing - and it is only a blind buffleheaded guess - that I saw only the edited version. Whatever, I still like the version I see now.
Bridge is testing me, and I'm failing.
1) It doesn't want to show me the last image in the folder. When I move the slider out, I see the last image, but when I let go of the slider, it tends to disappear again. Any idea what's going on?
2) It routinely says something like "178 items, 18 hidden." My iMac says the folder contains 196 images. What's a hidden image, why is it hidden, and how does it get un-hidden?
Little things I've put up with for a long time, and I would like to gain a little insight if anyone can provide it.
Well, I am sorry to report that I like #3 the best! No offense intended!
selmslie wrote:
I mention cropping in the article as an alternative to getting a longer lens. Cropping can be a slippery slope.
A more practical solution might be an M43 camera with a long lens, maybe a teleconverter. It's got to beat lugging some of the heavy and expensive monsters made for full frame.
Making up for a short lens is one reason to crop, but there are others. I have been advised to be careful composing in the viewfinder, but that doesn't always work for me, or I'm not always good at it. Maybe it's the ADHD, maybe it's the laziness I've long been accused of, or maybe it's some of the things I like to shoot, or maybe all of the above and more, but I routinely choose to step back a bit, and then crop in post, even - perhaps especially - when I'm working up close with a 105 macro lens. Not infrequently, I end up cropping a large amount in the end, often much more than I would have anticipated. Then, the fat chip can save me.
NJFrank wrote:
If I did anything with the sign I would clone it out. If you look at the house peaks they appear straight to my eye. I suspect the hills angle in front of the house may have something to do with how the house appears to some viewers. If I’m wrong it wouldn’t be my first time.
When I open it in ACR, things that I imagine should be vertical - like building corners - don't seem to be. Not off a great deal, but perhaps not a trivial amount, as I see it anyway.
I guess you guys just don't ever crop. An enviable luxury!
Think there's room for another cougar behind the archer?
It is certainly a lovely, moody image. I wouldn't "crop" out the sign, but maybe clone it out, leaving the crop as is. Is it my tilted brain, or is the house not quite vertical, and then, really that tilted, or by design, or by neglect?
Maybe the bird image would be better served with a very little bit more light in the background, but I like it as is, with the slightest hints of background. It forces me to look at the bird, and in this case I really like what I saw.