Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: edh
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 next>>
Mar 10, 2012 19:08:24   #
Hope it's OK to share.. I thought these would be appreciated in this forum.. These pics are incredible..

http://pavel-kosenko.livejournal.com/303194.html?thread=22669914

ed
Go to
Feb 26, 2012 18:45:51   #
I use hinging tape for matting, but there are other options.. http://www.framedestination.com/picture_frame_mounting.html
Go to
Feb 25, 2012 13:01:21   #
sinatraman wrote:
say twelve hail ansel adams, turn and face rhocester New york and repeat the phrase canon bites and all will be forgiven.!!!!!


That is hilarious nikon boy..

Never leave without my camera, that's my mantra.. Then I was making a quick trip to the store and forgot it.. Four bald eagles playing in the bay, two alight on pilings like a fricking seagull and two in a dead snag perfectly placed one on one dead limb and the other adjacent on another dead limb.. I have never, ever, left without it again.. Oh, and they have never, ever done that again in my presence..

:D
Go to
Feb 22, 2012 18:36:21   #
Thanks Michael.. I am convinced and saving as we speak.. Luckily my 3yr. old Dell is still functioning but not nearly as well as when I bought it even after memory upgrades.. I know several mac users who mysteriously do not have that issue.. I will spare everyone my opinion of windows, microsoft, and bill gates as none of that would add any value to the conversation..

ed

Michael O' wrote:
edh wrote:
I have heard, as i'm sure we all have, the discussions (arguments) regarding which platform is best.. However, I haven't heard it in the context of photography and would love to hear some opinions.. Since I think we're probably at least 75% PC users I would especially like to hear from any Mac users.. Thanks..

ed


edh, you have many replies below that mention consistency, reliability, purity of color reproduction, use by various kinds of pros, etc, so I won't go into any of that, but will relate the value of my MacBook Pro 17, now nearly 5 years old and running finely and faithfully, as are my 3 EOS bodies and many L series lenses. One of the things that attracted me to the Macbook was the relatively much greater electronic storage capability. And I can and do run windows and allied programs on it, so it is versatile. It is obviously portable and yet it functions as well at home on the desk as it does in the car or on some temporary "airport" site. I got it after owning and using 2 different Dell. I then ordered a third and they couldn't even get it built to the specs we had agreed upon -- so I sent it back. Found a good price (of course more than the Dell) and went to the 17" MacBook with its beautiful reproduction and ease of use. Have never been sorry, and would NOT go back to the clumsy Dell types. They are cheap because they are cheap; okay if that is what you want. But you cannot go wrong with the best -- in usage and life of the product. I bought mine from the manufacturer -- at a fair price. Check them out. I saved money right off the bat by buying from their refurbished lot -- with a NEW warranty.
It's only over 5 years old but gives no hint of failing,,-- which both of my Dells did.
Preference is surely personal, and mine is for MacBook and for Cannon. I gave my Nikon (with 4 lenses) away; surely NOT because it was not a fine camera, but because of the myriad of possibilities with the huge array of lens from Canon, and the quality of their L Series lenses, and their great and tough construction. I shoot much soccer and you will see that the great majority of Pro shooters use those white L-Series lenses that you see lined up on photographers' row just off of the goal line. There are a variety of reasons -- but enough to nearly call it a consensus. Now if I want a good rifle scope, I'll probably look at the Nikon since they are now concentrating on that market and offer a fair selection, along with the Europeans. Cannon offers 144 lens at last count, and nearly a third of them are L Series. They haven't branched out even into rangefinders. Pardon the pun, but they focus on photography. Even the great Leica has for years built binoculars and spotting scopes and rangefinders. Cannon -- lens and bodies.
Similarly, MacBook concentrates on quality, speed, durability, reliability, portability, and life, all of which I sought, and which my MacBook Pro 17 has consistently provided to me. There is much good product out there, but none better. Try it; I think you'll love it.

Too, Mac is less broken into, simply because the type of person that does that tends to write egress programs for the "majority"
of computers, which leaves Mac out as the primary target.
Michael O'
quote=edh I have heard, as i'm sure we all have, ... (show quote)
Go to
Feb 22, 2012 17:20:07   #
thanks..

BigBear wrote:
edh wrote:
Thanks BigBear, You bring up another question.. Is the migration process fairly straightforward? I will have a ton (not 28K however) to migrate as well so this would be good to know..

BigBear wrote:
I have a pc and a mac both side by side and have been migrating all of my pics from pc to mac because they look so much better on the mac. I have about 28,000 more to go. And Aperture doesn't work on pc's.


I direct connect my laptops with an ethernet cable (cross-over) and in Aperture I import directly from my pc at 1GB. Works great.
quote=edh Thanks BigBear, You bring up another q... (show quote)
Go to
Feb 22, 2012 13:32:13   #
Thanks everyone for your responses.. I knew the information I was looking for would come from you all and it has..

ed
Go to
Feb 22, 2012 13:29:53   #
This cracked me up Quickflash and being a long time windows user I definitely understand the whiskey..
ed

Quickflash wrote:
It obviously goes to ones' person preference. For me, it is Coca Cola & iMac. When I used a PC it was Windoze & Whiskey!

Note: My avatar pic was taken when I used windows!
Go to
Feb 22, 2012 13:27:16   #
Thanks BigBear, You bring up another question.. Is the migration process fairly straightforward? I will have a ton (not 28K however) to migrate as well so this would be good to know..

BigBear wrote:
I have a pc and a mac both side by side and have been migrating all of my pics from pc to mac because they look so much better on the mac. I have about 28,000 more to go. And Aperture doesn't work on pc's.
Go to
Feb 22, 2012 13:18:07   #
yep.. thanks..

Histogram wrote:
so you want a biased opinion then?

edh wrote:
I have heard, as i'm sure we all have, the discussions (arguments) regarding which platform is best.. However, I haven't heard it in the context of photography and would love to hear some opinions.. Since I think we're probably at least 75% PC users I would especially like to hear from any Mac users.. Thanks..

ed
Go to
Feb 21, 2012 23:30:04   #
I have heard, as i'm sure we all have, the discussions (arguments) regarding which platform is best.. However, I haven't heard it in the context of photography and would love to hear some opinions.. Since I think we're probably at least 75% PC users I would especially like to hear from any Mac users.. Thanks..

ed
Go to
Feb 20, 2012 17:30:16   #
MT Shooter wrote:
edh wrote:
MT, awesome that you went to the trouble to do this comparison and share the results.. I have asked a few pros at local craft shows and galleries and at least two of them love costco print processing.. You have provided another confirmation.. Thanks a lot for taking the time.. ed

MT Shooter wrote:
abc1234 wrote:
MT, thank you for your diligence. I agree with your conclusion that the difference is slight.

Note two more things.

1.) Tomorrow, you will not remember or care about the differences.

2.) Post-processing will have a larger effect on the final print than who prints it.


Tomorrow is here and I still care. I care enough not to spend more than 3 times the cost for very similar results. I also care about geting my results back in an hour or two compared to a week later.
And no matter how much PP is done, a crappy printer can still make it all useless. Hence, the comparison test was done.
Equivalent results considered, use a local quick processor and see your PP results almost immediately at a great price and guarantee? Or upload them to a far-off processor and have no control and not know what you will end up with for a week, and pay way too much for the priviledge? Your decision, I have made mine.
quote=abc1234 MT, thank you for your diligence. ... (show quote)
MT, awesome that you went to the trouble to do thi... (show quote)


Thanks.
I just cannot see the point of spending 3 or 4 times as much money for the same quality (or even inferior quality) plus having to wait a week to view the finished product. Makes no sense to me when I can have it in hand in an hour for so much less money. And if there is anything wrong, they will correct and reprint right away! I usually take care of my shopping while waiting, I never upload online as I do not trust the communication problem potentials of transferring from one server to the next. I always take my images into the store personally, never a question that way.
quote=edh MT, awesome that you went to the troubl... (show quote)


Neither can I.. More time and more money, both annoying.. I don't think I've ever gotten out of a costco in less than an hour so that's a non-issue.. I assume you deliver your files via a flash (thumb) drive.. Seems pretty easy.. Thanks again..
Go to
Feb 20, 2012 17:00:58   #
MT, awesome that you went to the trouble to do this comparison and share the results.. I have asked a few pros at local craft shows and galleries and at least two of them love costco print processing.. You have provided another confirmation.. Thanks a lot for taking the time.. ed

MT Shooter wrote:
abc1234 wrote:
MT, thank you for your diligence. I agree with your conclusion that the difference is slight.

Note two more things.

1.) Tomorrow, you will not remember or care about the differences.

2.) Post-processing will have a larger effect on the final print than who prints it.


Tomorrow is here and I still care. I care enough not to spend more than 3 times the cost for very similar results. I also care about geting my results back in an hour or two compared to a week later.
And no matter how much PP is done, a crappy printer can still make it all useless. Hence, the comparison test was done.
Equivalent results considered, use a local quick processor and see your PP results almost immediately at a great price and guarantee? Or upload them to a far-off processor and have no control and not know what you will end up with for a week, and pay way too much for the priviledge? Your decision, I have made mine.
quote=abc1234 MT, thank you for your diligence. ... (show quote)
Go to
Feb 19, 2012 17:09:47   #
Really very sorry for your loss.. We can sympathize as our lives can be measured in dog years like many others I am sure.. You're in our thoughts over here on the left coast.. ed
Go to
Feb 12, 2012 12:34:40   #
Hummers
Go to
Feb 12, 2012 12:09:52   #
Roadrunner wrote:
A very mad Etchemin River


Awesome..
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.