Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: therwol
Page: <<prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 342 next>>
Apr 5, 2024 22:14:49   #
burkphoto wrote:
ExFAT IS cross-platform compatible, but it is very dangerous. If you unplug the drive when it is mounted with open files , there is an EXTREMELY high likelihood you will lose data. I know this from personal experience. Fortunately, I had a double backup.


I was not aware of the danger with exFAT. The OP uses a Mac. I thought that cross platform compatibility would be desirable. I have sent gigs of family photos to my daughter on external hard drives formatted exFAT. She uses a Mac. So far no problems, but I'll warn her.
Go to
Apr 5, 2024 11:43:55   #
DaveyDitzer wrote:
but otherwise, no distinct advantage of Blu Ray over conventional DVDs?


The advantage of Blu Ray discs over DVD discs is capacity. The advantage of M-Discs over conventional discs is longevity. Conventional discs can deteriorate over time and are not considered permanent storage.
Go to
Apr 5, 2024 11:21:46   #
DaveyDitzer wrote:
Is there a particular advantage to using a blue ray rather than a conventional CD DVD player?


Backing up a large number of files to CD (700MB) or DVD (4.7 or 8.5 GB) is not really viable. It's viable if you burn high capacity Blu Ray discs (100GB), but a bit expensive. Conventional CD and DVD drives/players will not read Blu Ray discs. By they way, you can buy DVD M-Discs, but Verbatim has discontinued making them. I used them to archive some movies I recorded a long time ago off of cable that can't be bought or streamed. I could, and can play them in a DVD player.

If you're asking why not burn to conventional DVD-R or BD-R discs, the answer is longevity. The dyes is conventional recordable discs are not permanent. M-Discs can last 1000 years and are considered permanent storage. The government has used them for permanent storage of documents. Conventional discs are known to "rot" over time and become unreadable. The longevity can vary.
Go to
Apr 5, 2024 09:13:30   #
ken_stern wrote:
For photos I always want & never EVER want to lose I copy those photos to M-DISC the brand name I'm currently using is Verbatim


M-Discs are said to have a 1000 year life. They come in DVD and Blu Ray flavors. The largest Blu Ray discs are 100GB.

https://www.amazon.com/Verbatim-98913-M-Disc-100GB-Surface/dp/B011PIJPOC/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3F6CC165QQ0PH&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.O3j2um4BAReq-EfNSszSn7VC26UZesNBkuPFRrjvgCbGOpCdufoD8YYVaTxpMUZtZdvfcrCZnFcHEQNRqdM0Oi76UBvjWldQHXh4SW_UsZfgRNmj1PuQuy2esHI3VbsNBR9ooMN0QGZBTymSCnPCxc8t1PaixrHcZUsdkHxIZ9I.Dw1J_Ga9umzc91rMCNoNgAtMm0qNNpP5C0NNa4r4Ek0&dib_tag=se&keywords=m-disc%2B128gb&qid=1712321780&sprefix=m-disc%2Caps%2C147&sr=8-1&th=1

I believe that most current Blu Ray burners can burn them but not all. My LG external Blu Ray burner can burn them. They can usually be read by a standard external Blu Ray drive. Even so, having only one backup is not a good idea. (House may burn down, etc.)

Many people will buy at least 2 and preferrably 3 external drives and make multiple backups in case of drive failure. One should be kept offsite. Others will keep one copy of their files in the cloud and one or two on external drives. These drives can fail. I have friends who can attest to that. SSD drives may be more reliable than the spinning HDDs, but if one fails, it may be impossible to recover data from them. Not so with HDDs, but recovery can be very expensive. In any case, MULTIPLE backups is a really good idea to avoid that nightmare and expense.

If you buy an external drive, format it exFAT. exFAT drives can be written to and read by Macs and Windows machines.
Go to
Apr 2, 2024 17:44:23   #
stavros wrote:
On our fall vacation to Destin, Florida last October Annette and I decided to stop in nearby Valparaiso Florida to visit the Air Force Armament Museum.

The Air Force Armament Museum is a military aviation museum adjacent to Eglin Air Force Base in Valparaiso, Florida, dedicated to the display of Air Force armament. It is supported by the private, non-profit Air Force Armament Museum Foundation.

The Air Force Armament Museum is the only museum in the world dedicated to the collection, preservation and exhibition of artifacts and memorabilia associated with Air Force Armament and its platforms of delivery. There are over twenty-nine different aircraft that have found a home at the Air Force Armament Museum including an AC-130, B-17, B-25, B-52, P-51, A-10, F-15, F-16, F-100, F-101, and many other aircraft from the WWII era to the present. There are also several hundred pieces of armament to include a gun collection, bombs, bomblets, and missiles.

The museum was conceived and approved in 1974 but there was no suitable structure available on Eglin Air Force Base until 1976. In the spring of that year, an old Enlisted Club facility became available, and the Armament Museum became a reality. To help fund and perpetuate this Museum, the Air Force Armament Museum Foundation (AFAMF), a philanthropic non-profit organization, was established.

From 1976 through 1981, the artifact collection grew, and the Museum averaged 80,000 visitors per year. But, in 1981, the building housing the Museum collection was condemned, and the Museum closed that October.

The Air Force Armament Museum Foundation (AFAMF) then began what became a lengthy effort to find a new home for the Armament Museum. After a slow start, funding efforts began in 1984. By mid-1985, $1.2 million in private and corporate donations had been raised and construction of a new 28,000 square foot Museum was underway and in November of the same year, the new Museum was deeded to the United States Air Force and opened to the public.

Admittance to the Museum is free of charge and the Museum is open every day and most Federal Holidays. Over two million people have now visited and enjoyed this Museum. Numerous significant, military-related ceremonies such as promotions, reenlistments, retirements, and meetings occur within the Museum each month. Visits by school, church and veterans' groups are now almost daily occurrences and the Armament Museum has become an important educational, cultural, and social landmark.

Driving onto the grounds of the Air Force Armament Museum, visitors first notice the array of numerous aircraft on display. The fastest plane ever built, the SR-71 Blackbird is the centerpiece flanked by numerous planes from World War II, Korean, Vietnam and Gulf War eras. The Air Force Armament Museum is located on the Emerald Coast of the Florida Panhandle. It is on Highway 85 South, seven miles north of Fort Walton Beach. The museum is open Sunday through Saturday from 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Central Time. Tours are self-guided. Photography is permitted and encouraged.

These photos with Topaz and Dynamic Auto Painter Pro effects were taken in October. I shot in RAW with my Nikon D750 camera and used Corel AfterShot Pro to convert the files. Then I used Topaz Denoise, Corel PaintShop Pro, and Luminar AI to further adjust and enhance the files in post processing. Finally, I used Dynamic Auto Painter Pro to add the Re-Acrylic painterly effects. I hope you enjoy!
On our fall vacation to Destin, Florida last Octob... (show quote)


Very nice photos. Post processing well done for a nice effect. If you're into this sort of thing, the Battleship Park in Mobile has many similar planes, and you get to see the inside of a WWII battleship as a bonus.
Go to
Apr 2, 2024 15:20:53   #
jerryc41 wrote:
Yes, I'm back with a very odd situation. I cannot type a message in Gmail. When I start to type, the first few letters do not appear. Ahead of the cursor are miscellaneous words and letters. Deleting, starting in a different location or with a different font makes no difference.

I can type just fine in the subject line, and I can type anywhere else - word processor, Quicken, UHH, etc. I connected the wired keyboard to different USB ports, but that made no difference. I was able to send an email by typing the message in WordPerfect and pasting it into the email.

I just tried it again, and "At home" appeared after the cursor. I don't recall typing those words recently.

I just typed, "I want to find a way to make this work." This is what I got: "t to find a way to make this work.on And in"

I can reply to an email, but I cannot type one of my own.
Yes, I'm back with a very odd situation. I cannot... (show quote)


Works on another computer? Start with that. How about in another browser? What do you have installed on your machine?
Go to
Apr 2, 2024 14:07:57   #
Longshadow wrote:
Well, I purchased this last August, works great! Supports two monitors.
BUT, it depends on your preferences, desires, and requirements.....

https://www.costco.com/hp-envy-desktop---13th-gen-intel-core-i7-13700---windows-11-professional.product.4000159147.html


This machine has 32GB RAM. That's more than adequate. It also has two hard drives, one SSD (512GB) and one HDD (1TB). That's fine too. The price is good. The only thing I see that it doesn't have is a dedicated graphics card. Depending on what you do, it may not matter, but it might if you're editing video. Video editors sometimes make heavy use of the graphics GPU. Anyway, fine machine on a budget. Some on UHH are going to suggest spending megabucks or having a custom machine built. Whatever suits them, but buying from Costco is the easiest thing in the world.
Go to
Apr 1, 2024 17:13:22   #
cahale wrote:
The military has plans for every known scenario and even some unknown ones. They share a commonality - none of them work.


All it takes is to set off a nuke in the upper atmosphere. The satellites would not necessarily be destroyed, but it would ionize the atmosphere and prevent communication between the ground and satellites. I don't know how long this effect would last, but it's a known issue.

Back in the day, our nuclear missiles relied on self-contained inertial guidance, accurate enough to take out a target at 6000 miles with no communication with the ground or satellites for guidance. I wonder if this is still the case. GPS could easily be knocked out within minutes.
Go to
Mar 31, 2024 21:29:51   #
lbrande wrote:
Smart engineer. Always look to nature first. Several million years of evolution will probably give us a good basis for the optimum design.


Isn't it interesting that modern airplanes have wings and a tail? Just saying.
Go to
Mar 31, 2024 17:56:10   #
dbrugger25 wrote:
It might have been DirectTV. They installed a dish antenna on my roof several years ago. I got poor reception and often the image would "dissolve" on the screen. Whenever it rained the signal was constantly poor. I kept calling and was told they weren't responsible for the weather. I would explain the image problems and they would remotely reset my system and the problems continued. Then, one day a workman on my property noticed that the dish was mounted too low on my steep roof and was only partially seeing the sky. I called and was told that I would have to pay $100.00 for a service call.

In a much earlier time period, I had a business. Our phone service was with Verizon but there was an unspecified service charge on our bill. I finally noticed it and called Verizon to inquire about the charge and was told it was an ATT charge. I called ATT and, after a long inquiry, was told it was a charge for two toll-free numbers. I didn't know we had toll free numbers and asked what the numbers were, and they told me. I asked how long I had those numbers and was told it had been five years. I asked how I happened to get those numbers and they couldn't or wouldn't tell me.

I explained that I was the business owner and had never authorized those numbers and that I wanted a refund.

$178.00 per month for about five years would amount to $10,680. They told me I could get a refund for three months and that was all I could get. I insisted on talking to a person with more authority and worked my way up the chain of command. I got nowhere. In fact, the higher up I went, the ruder the people were. At least I got a little refund and stopped the money bleed. I did file a complaint with the appropriate government agencies, such as the FCC, but they didn't do anything to help me.

You can now see why I hate ATT and will never do business with them.
It might have been DirectTV. They installed a dis... (show quote)


It pays to look at your bill every month and question charges that you don't understand. I had the same problem with Comcast, being charged for a modem when they never put a modem in my house. The charge was there for as long as I could view my bills online. I always used my own and upgraded as necessary. Like with ATT, they only refunded three months of charges.

I used ATT for my wireless service for a long time. I got a discount through the company I worked for. Even with that, the charges were out of line with other companies. I ditched them for Consumer Cellular. But interestingly, Consumer Cellular will give you a T-Mobile SIMM card as the default or ATT if you ask. I got poor cell phone service in the hilly area where I live with the T-Mobile card and switched to ATT. At least I'm getting their cell service for a lot less than they'd charge me for it.

As for DirecTV, it was a disaster. (From a Satellite Dish. I don't know anything about their Internet streaming plan, which didn't exist when I used their service.) Reception was poor in rainy weather. The DVR recordings were hit or miss. They'd freeze. They would speed up suddenly to lightning speed. DirecTV didn't include all of the local sub-channels like MeTV and others. I had to resort to using an antenna if my wife wanted to watch Leave It To Beaver reruns.

I have an ATT landline, a real landline, not what some companies call a landline that relies on the Internet. I'm about to ditch it. I always felt that it was a safety issue in case of an emergency and possible loss of cell service and Internet. It's costing me over $100 per month. The extra charges on the bill are a mile long. I don't even know what most of them are for. ATT wants to pull out of the landline business in California. Fine with me.
Go to
Mar 31, 2024 16:31:26   #
jerryc41 wrote:
Netflix offered me the chance to upgrade the quality of the video I watch for an addition $7.50 a month. To persuade me, they showed a blurry example of what I'm getting now and a very sharp example of what I could be watching. I really don't care! besides that, what I am watching now is sharp, provided it was recorded sharp. Going from $17 to $25 is not in my future.


They want you to pay for UHD/4K. I don't find standard HD to be particularly blurry at the distance I sit to watch TV. I have 55 and 65 inch TVs. When I play a UHD/4K disc, I can see some difference but not much unless I get very close to the TV. I'm not going to pay them for the upgrade either.
Go to
Mar 31, 2024 10:45:10   #
AzPicLady wrote:
The mottling in the sky is from my trying to remove the thousands of dust spots! The company that developed the film is the top place in the Valley, so I don't fault them. I fault the scanner. It creates horrid dust spots!


You're probably right. Removing dust spots can leave behind artifacts. I would want to be sure before buying a new scanner. You can take a negative that hasn't had contact with the scanner, preferrably with the sky in it, and look at it with a strong magnifier to see if there is anything on the film. This just doesn't seem normal and takes away from the beautiful picture.
Go to
Mar 31, 2024 09:40:19   #
AzPicLady wrote:
On Wednesday I took the new Hasselblad with a roll of Ektar 100 out to the river to see what the Hasse would do with my favorite local mountain. I got the roll developed that afternoon by TCR and came home with the negs to do the scanning. Ever since then I've been working to clean up the dust spots. (That's why I don't like scanning!) I found a spot where I could get some foreground interest in the frame for Cany143.

The resulting TIFF is 201 mg. Sort of large, no?

I think this camera is a keeper. It's easy to use and gives pretty nice results. What do you think?
On Wednesday I took the new Hasselblad with a roll... (show quote)


I just downloaded your picture and look at the image at 100%. Unless you have weird clouds where you live, the sky should not look like that. The blue appears mottled, not even. There are broad areas of irregular white where there shouldn't be any. I don't believe that this is caused by dust. So A. Get someone else to develop your film and see if the results are the same, or B. You're creating artifacts from removing dust spots in a photo editor (seems unlikely but possible.)

I have scanned thousands of negatives and slides. Dust spots have a sharp margin. Same with hair from my dogs that got on them. These are my thoughts.
Go to
Mar 31, 2024 02:30:13   #
NateB wrote:
There's something I’d like to say, but it would probably be rather useless, cuz this whole discussion has been rather lame, so I s’pose I’ll just keep quiet, cuz it might start another useless argument. Bottom line, use what works for you. Different people have different likes, so just cuz you prefer one brand doesn’t mean it’s the best, neither does it mean that others have no right to prefer a different brand. To each his own

P. S. If everyone would use the same brand, the other camera companies would go out of business and then there’d be no more competition and then what? Camera technology wouldn’t advance nearly as fast anymore
There's something I’d like to say, but it would pr... (show quote)


I think the point of this thread was a joke. You need to understand a bit about the person in the title. Nothing serious here.
Go to
Mar 30, 2024 18:58:57   #
AzPicLady wrote:
On Wednesday I took the new Hasselblad with a roll of Ektar 100 out to the river to see what the Hasse would do with my favorite local mountain. I got the roll developed that afternoon by TCR and came home with the negs to do the scanning. Ever since then I've been working to clean up the dust spots. (That's why I don't like scanning!) I found a spot where I could get some foreground interest in the frame for Cany143.

The resulting TIFF is 201 mg. Sort of large, no?

I think this camera is a keeper. It's easy to use and gives pretty nice results. What do you think?
On Wednesday I took the new Hasselblad with a roll... (show quote)


It's a beautiful picture. I'm puzzled by your need to clean up dust spots on a newly scanned negative. If there is crud on the film, then you need to find a new place to develop your film. If you're not able to control dust getting on the film in the scanning process, then you need to work on a routine that discourages it, blower, light brush etc. The Staticmaster brushes are quite effective, but they've gotten really expensive and have a limited life before you have to replace them or the Polonium inside. Don't forget that dust on the glass of the scanner will be picked up as well. You might consider having the film developer scan the negatives for you, but results may vary, depending on who you use.

A TIFF of that size would be about normal for a 6x6 negative, especially if you're scanning to 16 bit depth (48 bit color).
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ... 342 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.