Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: RockinRobinG
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 36 next>>
Jan 14, 2012 07:13:57   #
mickeys wrote:
how's the weather there. here it's very cold and snow


Since ya didn't respond via "QUOTE REPLY"...Who ya askin'?
Go to
Jan 14, 2012 07:09:31   #
steve_stoneblossom wrote:
RockinRobinG wrote:

And I suppose you already know why manhole covers are always round, eh?


It is the only shape cover which cannot accidentally fall through its hole.


***DING, DING, DING***
You got it Steve.
Believe it or not, a lot of people have never thought about this, don't know why, or could care less. <grins> (Useless trivia?)
Go to
Jan 14, 2012 07:05:28   #
Your photo entry is a WINNER!!! It's beautiful.

Just remember, the 'cheater' will have to answer on 'judgment day.'

Opinion: Judging should be done by a minimum of three people with NO entrants present. Case in point: A gal pal won "Best of Division" at the State Fair (5 judges). The following year she entered the same image at the County Fair and didn't even get so much as an Honorable Mention (1 local judge). Judging is so subjective and you never know what the judges are looking for. Another issue: State Fair rules SPECIFICALLY state "NO PHOTOSHOP" images (other than cropping and clean-up) are allowed. When I went to view the results there was a 2nd place ribbon on an image that was b/w with selective color. Pretty obvious what had been done. So...when I went to collect my photos, I mentioned it to the person who had been chosen as the 'administrator' for the open entries in 2012. She was very much aware of the issue and said she would be policing the judging very carefully this year. Ahhhhh...we'll see if "the squeaky wheel gets the oil".

Despite the fact that you didn't win the $$$, you're still a winner to all your Hedgehog buddies. Don't be soured by one bad incident. Keep at it JW!!!
Go to
Jan 14, 2012 06:35:55   #
[quote=johnnyg67][Robin,Wow you is edumacated! Could you type this again a little slower? I'm from the South ya'll.

PS You're number 400 for me looks like I have to remark on your post on my special numbers for good luck! (hope the little UHH feller that changes numbers here gets it right this time! :mrgreen: [/quote]

I'm typing as s l o w l y a s I c a n J o h n n y.
I may be 'edumacated' but not to the degree of knowing all of this stuff! <Laf'n>
Google is my best friend when it comes to searching for info on the internet.
BTW..."Happy 400!" Your next response will be #??? It will show just how busy you've been. <grins>
Go to
Jan 14, 2012 06:29:41   #
Guy Johnstone wrote:
Ok, now do PNG.


Response #1:
Papua New Guinea. (My pastor just came back from a 2-week trip there.)

or

Response #2:
Portable Network Graphics (PNG) is a bitmapped image format that employs lossless data compression. PNG was created to improve upon and replace GIF (Graphics Interchange Format) as an image-file format not requiring a patent license. The initialism PNG can also be interpreted as a recursive initialism for "PNG's Not GIF".
PNG supports palette-based images (with palettes of 24-bit RGB or 32-bit RGBA colors), grayscale images (with or without alpha channel), and full-color non-palette-based RGB[A] images (with or without alpha channel). PNG was designed for transferring images on the Internet, not for professional-quality print graphics, and therefore does not support non-RGB color spaces such as CMYK.
PNG files nearly always use file extension PNG or png and are assigned MIME media type image/png; it was approved for this use by the Internet Engineering Steering Group on October 14, 1996. PNG was published as an ISO/IEC standard in 2004.
History and development
The motivation for creating the PNG format was in early 1995, after it became known that the Lempel–Ziv–Welch (LZW) data compression algorithm used in the Graphics Interchange Format (GIF) format was patented by Unisys. There were also other problems with the GIF format that made a replacement desirable, notably its limit of 256 colors at a time when computers able to display far more than 256 colors were growing common. Although GIF allows for animation, it was decided that PNG should be a single-image format. A companion format called Multiple-image Network Graphics (MNG) has been defined for animation, whereas a competing format, Animated Portable Network Graphics (APNG), supports backward-compatibility with PNG (which MNG does not).
A January 1995 precursory discussion thread, on the usenet newsgroup "comp.graphics" with the subject Thoughts on a GIF-replacement file format, had many propositions, which would later be part of the PNG file format. In this thread, Oliver Fromme, author of the popular DOS JPEG viewer QPEG, proposed the PING name, meaning PING is not GIF, and also the PNG extension.
- October 1, 1996: Version 1.0 of the PNG specification was released, and later appeared as RFC 2083. It became a W3C Recommendation on October 1, 1996.
- December 31, 1998: Version 1.1, with some small changes and the addition of three new chunks, was released.
- August 11, 1999: Version 1.2, adding one extra chunk, was released.
- November 10, 2003: PNG became an International Standard (ISO/IEC 15948:2003). This version of PNG differs only slightly from version 1.2 and adds no new chunks.
- March 3, 2004: ISO/IEC 15948:2004.

Ok Guy Johnstone, this is the last time I'm doing your homework for you. <giggles>
Go to
Jan 13, 2012 20:34:26   #
sinatraman wrote:
yes but can you fit a jpeg into a square hhole?


And I suppose you already know why manhole covers are always round, eh?
Go to
Jan 13, 2012 20:31:57   #
ggttc wrote:
Forgive me for saying....you guys have way too much time on your hands...but it is interesting...thanks


Hope you're not making reference to me! <ha>
My 'research' took all of one minute before I went to work (unfortunately...someone's gotta do it). <grins>
Go to
Jan 13, 2012 20:29:53   #
nikon_jon wrote:
Very informative data on JPEG there. Without all the technical jargon, which is ok of course, I will relate how I became acquainted with the purpose and history of JPEG.

As has been mentioned it was a group formed in 1986 and on a practical level here why a change was needed.

In 1989 I went to work as a photographer for our local newspaper. It was a small enough operation that the photogs also had to work with pre-publish prep. That is, knowing how to use a flat bed camera and make screen prints for reproduction.

Wire photos from AP (Associated Press) came over a fax machine in the office that was dedicated to only receiving wire pix. They took a lot of time and the machine used thermal paper. About the only kind of fax available at that time. Color came as separations. That is, pix separated into the three basic colors, cyan, magenta, yellow and one for black. This could take up to two hours or more depending on location of the origin of the print and quality of connections. If the transmission failed, you had to start over.

When you were at 'crunch time' and the editor didn't have that pic he wanted of the terrorist who died in Lower Slobovia when he choked on a banana and fell over having spasms in his upper glottalucas and couldn't respirate so he died, then we all suffered because editors often had no patience when they didn't get their way.

This was a problem everywhere that newspapers had to deal with, so AP along with others supported the JPEG (Joint Photographic Experts Group) group and contributed to their efforts so as to provide a system to compress photo data digitally so it could be transmitted over the wire services in a faster more efficient way. When we were getting pix in a matter of minutes instead of hours and the quality was way, a whole lot, much better, it was like champaign and caviar.
Very informative data on JPEG there. Without all ... (show quote)


Yeah...what he said! <giggles>
Go to
Jan 13, 2012 20:27:45   #
Old Timer wrote:
You are Rockin, Robin.


<Laf'n> Thanks!
Go to
Jan 13, 2012 20:26:43   #
Santayo wrote:
You cheated Robin


Nope. That's simply how you find things like this.
Go to
Jan 13, 2012 08:09:52   #
nikon_jon wrote:
Wow! Now I am impressed. And so early in the morning!

How bout the when and why?


The name "JPEG" stands for Joint Photographic Experts Group, the name of the committee that created the JPEG standard and also other standards. It is one of two sub-groups of ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1, Subcommittee 29, Working Group 1 (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 1) – titled as Coding of still pictures.[3][4][5] The group was organized in 1986,[6] issuing the first JPEG standard in 1992, which was approved in September 1992 as ITU-T Recommendation T.81[7] and in 1994 as ISO/IEC 10918-1.

The JPEG standard specifies the codec, which defines how an image is compressed into a stream of bytes and decompressed back into an image, but not the file format used to contain that stream.[8] The Exif and JFIF standards define the commonly used file formats for interchange of JPEG-compressed images.

(I love Google and Wikipedia) Anything else you might want to know? <giggles>
Go to
Jan 13, 2012 07:53:23   #
The name stands for [b]Joint Photographic Experts Group.]/b] JPEG itself specifies only how an image is transformed into a stream of bytes, but not how those bytes are encapsulated in any particular storage medium. A further standard, created by the Independent JPEG Group, called JFIF (JPEG File Interchange Format) specifies how to produce a file suitable for computer storage and transmission (such as over the Internet) from a JPEG stream. In common usage, when one speaks of a "JPEG file" one generally means a JFIF file, or sometimes an Exif JPEG file. There are, however, other JPEG-based file formats, such as JNG. (Etc., etc., etc.,)

[Note: Google]
Go to
Jan 11, 2012 08:47:28   #
Mary P wrote:
I won a bag of goodies with this picture that was put in a local calendar. First one I've ever put in any sort of judging, so it was really fun for me! Unfortunately, they cropped off the sides of the barn and the sun in the picture! Oh well. It's just local.


WOOHOO!!! (In capital letters...) Congrats!!!
Go to
Jan 11, 2012 07:56:34   #
RobGilchrist wrote:
Let's see all those beautiful fog shots!


Thanks for the post Rob. Sharing a couple of mine...early morning fog laying low accross my pasture. Taken with my old Nikon P90. I'm patiently waiting to try this again with the new Nikon D3100.




Go to
Jan 10, 2012 23:48:34   #
artlover wrote:
We have some unusual weather condition here in SWNM.
I call it "indian" weather.

The weather forecast calls for "a patchy frozen fog"! :mrgreen:

So how do you photograph fog???????


Wait till it freezes on everything...it's called Pogonip...then you can photograph the 'frozen' fog! <giggles> SERIOUSLY!!!
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 36 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.