I can’t explain the SD card issue. I know my older Canon PowerShot G15 creates directories on the SD card and they show up on my computer (W10). Absent accidentally erasing the photos, I’d use the USB 2.0 port to connect it to your computer with a USB cord.
gwilliams6 wrote:
Not true. As someone who worked in newspapers for decades, the real reason newspapers have gone away or slimmed down was the advent of online and the subsequent loss of print advertising dollars. It was always those print ad dollars, more than revenue from subscriptions, those millions from daily ads that kept newspapers alive and solvent. Once the readers went to online, the print ads dried up.
One important difference about the so-called journalists today online , is that at our respected newspapers, we had to vet every story with at least two sources of verifiable proof before an editor would let ANY story appear in the newspaper. Today ANYONE can post and/or say anything and call it news, without ANY verifiable facts to back it up, and they do.
There are still a few major newspapers that have enough finances to weather the storm and have successful online versions pulling in some subscribers and some ads. Editorial integrity still matters at these few survivors.
As visual journalists and photographers, what you have to realize is this fight about AI has to do with important legal issues also, as photographic evident is key in many important cases, and that photographic evidence needs to have integrity and remain real and NOT be AI generated. If photographs are no longer real, that can affect our lives and freedoms in many ways.
This is a fight that the National and International courts will want to weigh in on too.
Cheers and best to you.
Not true. As someone who worked in newspapers for ... (
show quote)
Thank you, gwilliams6, for posting this. What you posted saved me from pointing out the same facts.
Nice shot and good news, Jay Pat.
Check the Rick Steves website.
As best I can tell, you’re in a northern suburb of Milwaukee. I did a Google search for photo labs and came up with this result:
B & L Photo Lab. 4.4 mi. 5.0 (2 reviews) ...
Art's Cameras Plus. 7.4 mi. 3.7 (55 reviews) ...
Express Photo Lab. 4.5 mi. 9026 W National Ave, Milwaukee, WI 53227. ...
VIP Pro Lab & Video, Inc. 71.9 mi. 4.5 (11 reviews) ...
Portraits Now. 34.4 mi.
And the link for this is here:
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=custom+photo+labs+milwaukee+wisconsinI’d lean toward getting in touch with one of these because my preference is to work locally. For example, for me in Victoria, where our local custom lab recently closed due to the owner’s retirement, I’d consider labs in Houston — two hours north of me — as “local” for custom work.
Best of luck.
Manglesphoto wrote:
Nice image
I probably would have suggested to her to lose that crappy bikini and pose for me.
I've been waiting to see if someone would come up with this. It was my first thought. We could also have found out if she was a real blonde -- which is, by the way -- the rarest hair color in Texas.
Don't let the prudes run you -- and us -- off.
I had the same problem with the Canon Powershot G15. It can be repaired. And I liked the camera so much that I now have two. I used
John Han
MYK Camera Repair
610 East Central Road
Des Plaines, IL 60016
(847) 803-6579
http://www.myksvc.comvideorepair@hotmail.com
Bill_de wrote:
You just don't get it!
Ken is having fun, got a picture published and got credit for a photo. Ken is excited about it. He got praise where he wasn't looking for any. There is no reason to pee on his parade! Let him enjoy his time in the limelight and start your own topic to talk about all the legal BS.
----
How disappointing and sad to see some of you respond with this kind of post. Neither Alan nor I were raining on Ken’s parade. In fact, we were being supportive and offering information to him (and to people like you, Bill_de, who obviously need it) — information that would help protect his rights as a photographer. That “legal BS” also would protect your rights, Bill_de, and those who agreed with you.
You know, UHH is supposed to be a place where we help one another by sharing and trading knowledge. I just “don’t get it” why doing so was so offensive.
JohnSwanda wrote:
If the OP donated his time to shoot the candidates and gave them the photos, they probably assumed they had the right to use them in their campaign. The editor should still have checked to see if they had permission to use them, but if the OP expected payment if they were published, he should have had a contract to that effect.
John and others,
I don’t mean to be contentious here, but for the newspaper to credit the photo properly, which OP wrote that it did, someone in the newsroom had to know who shot it. And thus, that’s a straight-line phone call from the newsroom to the supplier of the photo (I assume a file) to Ken (OP) for permission — and on that we agree.
As for payment, the class act would have been for the newspaper to offer Ken money. An a prior contract in this case is irrelevant because the use of the photo was a surprise. As I said, Ken wouldn’t have been out of line to ask for money.
The Amarillo Independent’s (my newspaper) two photogs were veteran shooters who worked with me as friends/colleagues with a verbal agreement on each assignment. We were a small, upstart weekly operation and the whole group of us shared the mission we had for the Indy. It was the best seven years of my 22-year journalism career.