I don't necessarily agree with you although your comment has merit, but I love that song!
Latest numbers are the Federal Flood Program, prior to Harvey, is $25 BILLION in debt. If this storm doesn't break the program then nothing can or will. Our politicians cant agree on anything except when it coms to giving money away and bailing out businesses and programs.
In the Houston area they suffered a one in 800 years flood event. This means that a flood of this magnitude only occurs once in every 800 years. It is difficult if not impossible to buy flood coverage if the Government has not declared your area eligible for flood insurance. While it may not have been eligible then it will be now. Too little too late. As the saying goes, hope for the best prepare for the worse. I will be building a retirement home on a river near the coast of AL. The flood requirements say it must be 10' above ground, the house I own now is 8', so I will tear it down and build one 12' off the ground. That is a lot of steps so I am installing an outside elevator. But I whole hardily agree with flood for people on the coast who encounter tidal surge, wind and rising waters. There is no excuse for the American people to have to subsidize these homes when a great number of them are second homes or rentals. We, as American taxpayers subsidize the insurance and after Houston, insurance will be so expensive if not prohibitive. The Federal flood program is like social security. It has been broke for a while.
I have had two lens repaired in the past year. Both dropped. I sent them to the VA location. Both times the lens got there in 3 days, I had an estimate in 24 hours and the lens was repaired in less than 5 days and shipped back. The whole thing took a week. Did you use the on-line repair service where you completed and sent in the information you entered yourself? Then printed a copy and included it in with the lens? All correspondence was then done my e-mail and tacking the same. Wok was first class but not necessarily cheap.
What kind of solar filter are you using? I have been shooting at ISO 400, F/8, 1/2-1 sec and my pictures have been fine. I don't know what camera you are using but both Canon and Nikon have good websites on how to photograph the eclipse.
I joined this forum a few months ago thinking I would learn more about photography. I am 67 years old and plan on retiring at the end of the year and getting more serious about my hobby. What I was hoping for is more pictures with information about the scene and equipment. Where, time of day, type of camera. lens, filters used, settings, processing, etc. I see very little if any of this. Looking and admiring someone's excellent photograph is nice but not helpful in any sense. It seems like there should be one place where people post their photographs and more information about them to help others.
Does anyone know of another forum where this is done? I love reading the opinions, well most of them, and the other information about products relative to photography, but would just like to see more info about how a particular picture was obtained.
Thanks for you advice.
Hopefully, this thread wont turn out to be a Nikon VS Canon... I don't think I can take anymore of that.
Thanks, that is a great site. One of the best I have seen and I have been researching the eclipse for months. I cannot imagine not taking pictures of it. One thing in this article concerned me. Canon mentions more than once, an ISO of 800. I am pretty sure I have read elsewhere to use the fastest ISO your camera has. While that makes sense the Canon recommendation does not. Anyone provide any insight into this? I have compiled numerous websites to review but this seems to be a major contradiction.
Thanks,
The technical aspect of this conversation is both esoteric and complicated. But, speaking as a consumer and depending on what my intentions were for a picture, if I were going to display a photograph prominently in my home, I would pay more for a signed and numbered print. In every aspect of life, especially antiques, for instance, the fewer there are of them the more valuable they become.
Speaking as a photographer...if I saw a great print I admired I would try to seek out a same or similar scenario and try to emulate it. After all, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and in the end isn't that what photographers want. To take pictures so unique and well done people would want them in some form or another?
Awesome pictures! Can you share your equipment info. and settings with us?
Based on this study the best thing to do is to just leave it on the counter and do nothing. And why do some people have to introduce politics into a photographic discussion. She lost Trump won. Move on, especially on this meaningless Russian issue. You are hurting both parties. which in turn hurts the American people.
I went to their website and looked at their FAQ's but I still don't understand how you put the watermark on your photo. Can you size it and put it anywhere on the photo you want to? Text Box?
I own the Canon EF 100-400mm IS. I like the push pull feature and it takes very good bird pictures. I bought it on EBAY for just under a grand and sent it to Canon to be cleaned and checked out, it didn't need it and it is now like brand new. Refurbishing cost less that 200 bucks and I have a new lens.
We got into this on a reel cleaning forum last week as well. WD-40 is a solvent first and a lubricant second. The main ingredient is mineral oil as a lubricant. Its main purpose is to loosen frozen parts. It does NOT contain fish oil, an urban myth. I use it to loosen components but I cannot think of one use on a piece of optical equipment.