Peterfiore wrote:
Much of life is the want, not so much the need.
Think that's how I ended up getting married.
jerryc41 wrote:
I'm going offend some people with this, and I apologize, but this is my opinion.
There are two expressions that have been going around for a long time, and I think they are meaningless.
1. "You get what you pay for." Of course you get what you pay for - unless you forget to bring it out of the store when you leave. You select it, you pay for it, and you bring it home. The expression is supposed to suggest that if you pay more, you get a better product. Nonsense! Look for online reviews of anything, and you will see that price does not correlate with quality.
2. "The best camera is the one you have with you." This implies that you shouldn't worry about how good your camera is as long as you have one when you need it. Again, nonsense! In order for you to have it with you, you must first buy it. That involves lots of decisions concerning price, needs, make, and model. I've bought lots of cameras over the years, and I put a lot of thought into each purchase.
That's my rant for the day - well, for the morning, anyway.
I'm going offend some people with this, and I apol... (
show quote)
My fave-------. "Ooh, it's to die for"
I then like to pose the question to the exclaimer, "So if I gave you a ( named object or experience), and you partook, you would then be alright with me shooting you in the head?"
Right up there with " Ya know?" and "Right?"
I like to rapidly respond with, "No, I don't know. Could you explain it to me?" or "Gee whiz. I'm not sure if it's right or not. Could we discuss it before you continue?"
I guess I'm just getting to be an old fart, because such inaneties are starting to pester my sensibilities beyond what is probably reasonable.
Ooh. I think I just heard my vent slam shut.
Love those animals with signs.
With permission-----
w00dy4012 wrote:
From this morning's walk.
Nice view. looks like the camera may have focused on the foliage in the background, though.
Gabyto wrote:
Hello UHH members,
I can not seem to get a better picture of this owl at night. I increase the exposure to the max, but It did not work. My gera is Canon 5Div, Canon lens 100-400ii+1.4 extender III. Any help will be greatly appreciate. Thank you
Gabyto
This is my take after 5 min. in PSE. maybe I need something like Topaz to clean up the rest of the noise.
If you ARE shooting these at night, you may wish to try a shutter speed considerably less than 1/1000.
no. if they don't see them they can't want them.
I've never sold proof sets or digital "culls".
I sell my quality, not my seconds.
1/8 second. try 1/30 or 1/60 and pan with subject.
I wonder what I said to her to make her look at me like that.
CHG_CANON wrote:
When it comes to dots, is it more angels or pixels that can dance the hokey-pokey?
What if The Hokey Pokey really IS what it's all about?
Can't I just zoom or crop to the image composition I want and then print any size at somewhere between 300 and 1400 dots per inch, depending on what is most visually pleasing?