Posts for: jenny
May 6, 2017 23:46:23 #
Didereaux wrote:
Wild guess, but as mentioned by several that 'dummy' is not done in disrespect, nor oversight. Look carefully and you see it is very carefully tied to that tree, not like a scecrow and pounded into the ground. My money is that those two boys killed by the Nazis were suspected resistance, were caught, tied to those trees and shot. The dummy/icon to remind of the how they died.
* * * * *
So what prompted you to visit this member's dormant image Didereaux ?
May 6, 2017 22:31:32 #
Yes it is small and if you read the thread you know it was not intended to be. It was also darker than it should be or ever
anything I ever posted before could be, as everything usually matches my monitor.
Often I can tell quite well what an image promises by what is a TRUE thumbnail, i.e. not the snapshot size claimed
to be one as their so-called thumbs must mean they are giants from another planet.
And sometimes as well, the snapshot size fails to come across as having any promise, so then I download to look into it.
That's when something may really come alive to show its merits.
I regret you were deprived of the possibility of seeing a larger file, regret my inattention that it had been compressed
before sending it and then further so evidently when loaded to UH.
There is a bare possibility you might have had a better opinion had it been presented as intended, but if not, then
thank you for your time.
anything I ever posted before could be, as everything usually matches my monitor.
Often I can tell quite well what an image promises by what is a TRUE thumbnail, i.e. not the snapshot size claimed
to be one as their so-called thumbs must mean they are giants from another planet.
And sometimes as well, the snapshot size fails to come across as having any promise, so then I download to look into it.
That's when something may really come alive to show its merits.
I regret you were deprived of the possibility of seeing a larger file, regret my inattention that it had been compressed
before sending it and then further so evidently when loaded to UH.
There is a bare possibility you might have had a better opinion had it been presented as intended, but if not, then
thank you for your time.
May 6, 2017 22:00:46 #
Maybe the macro shot is lurking in the search feature at the top of the page?
Or is there any reason not to post it again anyway? Your landscape shot got some
notice on FYC because,... well, that's FYC. But how long ago, and was it here, you
showed a macro image? And then, I wind up with other things needing attention
so can't "live" here the way some do. I wonder wherever do they get the time..
And, Bob, I gotta say, you faithfully post your b&w landscape or landscape detail
still life and I regularly passed them by and then worried about how this could be
seen as neglect and lack of appreciation, not only for you but others as well.
The whole forum can't be the whole focus of my life so not here every day.
Guilty or not as I may be labeled, and probably deserve, many things tend to catch
my attention before monotone, so always aware of you, you tended to be, "seen and not
heard", until you burst out with a candle-lit still life.... in color yet!!
Or is there any reason not to post it again anyway? Your landscape shot got some
notice on FYC because,... well, that's FYC. But how long ago, and was it here, you
showed a macro image? And then, I wind up with other things needing attention
so can't "live" here the way some do. I wonder wherever do they get the time..
And, Bob, I gotta say, you faithfully post your b&w landscape or landscape detail
still life and I regularly passed them by and then worried about how this could be
seen as neglect and lack of appreciation, not only for you but others as well.
The whole forum can't be the whole focus of my life so not here every day.
Guilty or not as I may be labeled, and probably deserve, many things tend to catch
my attention before monotone, so always aware of you, you tended to be, "seen and not
heard", until you burst out with a candle-lit still life.... in color yet!!
May 6, 2017 21:14:59 #
Thank you Bob, for a reminder of the term you used to describe the procedure most of us can't use with
our digi-cameras and therefore don't even remember it. It's been so long since hearing it that I couldn't have
remembered even a faltering and inaccurate description if owning a camera depended on it. Suppose those with
a Nikon tilt shift lens could make use of the info though.
our digi-cameras and therefore don't even remember it. It's been so long since hearing it that I couldn't have
remembered even a faltering and inaccurate description if owning a camera depended on it. Suppose those with
a Nikon tilt shift lens could make use of the info though.
May 6, 2017 15:57:53 #
Have we been invaded by a maniac trying to destroy himself?? 
May 6, 2017 15:56:47 #
jenny wrote:
* * * * *
Great discussion does sort out the details beyond the usual confusions, thank you both Apaflo and Mr.Burk.
It would not probably satisfy those who question what they might achieve for IQ if sending their photos out for prints
so probably best not to use the "either/or" dpi/ppi terminology. For those such as I who do home print only at
8x10, it is added history to satisfy the ever-curious as to "why" we do what we do.
Great discussion does sort out the details beyond the usual confusions, thank you both Apaflo and Mr.Burk.
It would not probably satisfy those who question what they might achieve for IQ if sending their photos out for prints
so probably best not to use the "either/or" dpi/ppi terminology. For those such as I who do home print only at
8x10, it is added history to satisfy the ever-curious as to "why" we do what we do.
May 6, 2017 15:53:50 #
TheDman wrote:
http://rs208.pbsrc.com/albums/bb102/avl1/head_banging.gif~c200
* * * * *
Great discussion does sort out the details beyond the usual confusions, thank you both Apaflo and Mr.Burk.
It would not probably satisfy those who question what they might achieve for IQ if sending their photos out for prints
so probably best not to use the "either/or" dpi/ppi terminology. For those such as I who do home print only at
8x10, it is added history to satisfy the ever-curious as to "why" we do what we do.
May 6, 2017 13:02:02 #
CSand wrote:
My initial thought Jenny, was castle ruins. Personally I like the shot as I enjoy capturing things that are not what they appear to be. Viewing in gallery I would have thought a bit of sharpening and a hint of light on the "castle" would have enhanced.
* * * * *
CSand, You got it! When assigning titles to pictures it seems quotation marks are not allowed. But that was okay
maybe when the intention was to suggest the evidence remaining of some ancient civilization.
My apologies to all for the carelessness in not noticing that the file had been previously compressed as I had never
intended that anything placed in photo gallery or anywhere else!. Transferring files recently from where everything landed
when accepting Windows10, where a whole new format appears, with choices for individual pictures and for albums
but finding it not as convenient to work with when organizing or titling.
May 6, 2017 12:46:47 #
fuminous wrote:
Following instructions given... my reaction would be to stare and discover what interested the author sufficiently to capture the image and present it to the public.
I don't know for certain what captivated the photographer but I enjoy the textures and undulations, the suggested shapes and silhouettes. In short, I’d think, “’Good observation photographer’, thanks for stimulating my imagination; that was fun.”
I don't know for certain what captivated the photographer but I enjoy the textures and undulations, the suggested shapes and silhouettes. In short, I’d think, “’Good observation photographer’, thanks for stimulating my imagination; that was fun.”
* *** *
Very kind of you ,Fuminous, thank you very much.
May 6, 2017 03:24:34 #
Uuglypher wrote:
To which particular Dave do you refer?
* * * * *
To you Dave...and of course by now I have heard of "Empty magnification" although it's an odd sort
of forced inaccuracy if thinking about it. Even in defining it, some references used quotation marks.
Of course it is still magnification and by no means empty either, since if you took it all out there
wouldn't be a file. So I'll stay with my own definition for the sake of clarity, but it's
something we don't have much need to discuss usually, as we only look at it when editing our own
files... at midnight.
Looking back after the discussion I noticed some files have acquired new identification
over an inch long so thy have been changed to compressed. Seems like the game
changes every day when someone has a new idea at Microsoft and doesn't even say so. I'm sure
UH hasn't changed its rules on submitting pics with the 10,000 MB limit and the 600-800 was
it ? recommendation it always was.
May all Daves and everyone else have a nice weekend..
May 5, 2017 23:26:52 #
AnthonyM wrote:
Best of luck to you.
* * * * *
Thank you and the same for you! Don't ever let Windows10 or UH or anyone else dump your pixels all over
the floor, kitty might choke on their sharp edges. . First time I ever heard of them trying to escape though...
Really there would HAVE to be a term for exceeding maximum magnification wouldn't there, but for
some reason I never labeled it as anything but the point where the little squares begin to show themselves,
and they don't when opening the file. Have a nice weekend! jenny&Xeno
May 5, 2017 21:02:11 #
AnthonyM wrote:
This is a confusing discussion. The op has asked ... (show quote)
* * * * *
Guess it turned out to be the ruins after all!! Laf!! Sorry you had a bad time with it. No, I'm not interested in posting a larger version. Sorry it's about
3x5, that was not the intention surely, it was a bit of a shock to me in fact, and would have been just as disappointing as you found it. As to your
first statement, or so, no I would NOT think 3x5 was an adequate size so let's not be confused further by misrepresenting anything I said to interpret what you think I said that you did not understand... however that popular bit goes that never gets you out of being confused..Glad you think you saw what I hoped anyone might and some tried to..
It all may be confusing to you but I think it is very amusing.May such things never happen to you to find your impressive images compressed to 3x5 as you
might find your self depressed at the attempt to express what you thought you had addressed.
May 5, 2017 20:25:07 #
Uuglypher wrote:
Jenny,
"Empty magnification" is increasing image size with no accompanying increase in resolution of detail.
Dave
"Empty magnification" is increasing image size with no accompanying increase in resolution of detail.
Dave
* * * **
Never have seen that Dave.
May 5, 2017 20:19:18 #
Uuglypher wrote:
Jenny,
"Empty magnification" is increasing image size with no accompanying increase in resolution of detail.
Dave
"Empty magnification" is increasing image size with no accompanying increase in resolution of detail.
Dave
I've never seen this Dave.
May 5, 2017 20:17:02 #