The macro issue is a deal killer!

I like small stuff!!!

Lybia bombing was not a war and covered under the presidential powers.

Iraq was a war and had to go to congress but when the vote is done under the assumption that you are traitor if you do not vote for it, one can wonder the validity and legitimacy of the whole process. This is especially true as the reasons to go to war kept changing and were all lies.

You are right neither chamber have voted but the committee overseeing this did. This plus the presidential powers are enough and more than normally used knowing that this is not a war and hopefully will not become one, hence the 'no boots on the ground'. In the end thought, you ARE right. Neither chamber has voted.

As to the cost and assumption that it contributed to the economic crisis that followed... This is false. The cause was corporate and banking greed. Since the cause is still not addressed, it will happen again. The war(s) did drain the federal budget but not the country economical health itself, even if I would love to say so.

Thank you for your input and comments.

I apologize if you feel slighted by my comment.

The issue here is not the photographer or the image but the format. Ignoring a problem because 'you do not see it' does not make it go away.

As typed repeatedly, this is a possible work around over a known problem in image compression.

If you know of another one (other than shooting RAW or TIFF), please share it.

Since many folks took the time to it for me and this a known issue in ANY digital image compression format there are many links that exist and here is one among many... http://www.prophotoshow.net/2008/03/25/file-format-degradation-saving-destructive-edits-compared/

Trying to pick a 'fight' or 'argument' over what is a work around is childish and ridiculous. Got my drift?

You had a point is saying fewer folks print their work. If they did they would be surprised how shitty it comes out if not prepared correctly for a printed medium.

You just compound the artifacts present in all JPG images, if using a JPG from the start.

If you work from a different format and save it to share or for compatibility you have no issue, unless you use a lossy option (strong compression).

The idea here is not to say what is good or bad but to offer a small work around the successive degradations. This also is not a debate of the benefits and pitfalls of RAW vs other format.

Workflow essentially becomes :
Original JPG -> Conversion to a 16Bit file format -> Exported final image as JPG.

Archival process:
1 - Original JPG
2 - 16 bit file format edited

I have no problem with folks picture whatsoever, even bad ones, yours is good but using RAW would allow you to add the 'snap' that would make it a "wow!" instead of "good" or 'excellent'.

Using the afore mentioned higher bit depth would have prevented part of the artifacts and bleeding taking place in your image...

For info and my experience...

There is NO PERFECT SHOT. If you find one photographer capable of shooting perfect images most of the time that do not need any tweaking... Let me know.

Even the greatest photographers over time have pushed the lab work they did or had done for them.

Light is 'perfect' when we look at things as our brain compensate for the light quality (up to a point). Physical limitations in camera do not have this power of adjusting and I am not even speaking of dynamic range here, just quality of light. So the 'perfect lighting' in photography? It is similar to pissing up a rope.

Good question: why shoot in JPG in the first place? The answers lies in compatibility and instant share/result. Working in RAW is usually deemed 'too complex' so folks do not use the best format offered.

I shoot only RAW (NEF) but when I use a pocket camera I have no choice...

Take the time to read and see the answer.

Presidential powers: Set by law, not used in this instance.
Congress responsibility: Engaged since they voted FOR the 'intervention'

ONLY Congress can declare war by law, not the president.
President is allowed 60 days 'military intervention' to respond quickly to an external threat.

Is Syria action considered a threat to the US? No.
Is Syria breaking international law? Yes.
Is the US forced to intervene in any way? No.
Is this a real choice? No.
Is a UN mandate needed? Debatable.
Can and should a population support a war? No.
Should a population be 'asked'? No.
Should the US be the world 'police? No.

Should taxes be raised to pay for a war? We are still paying for WWII and of course Korea, Vietnam, to name a few. Taxes pay for that over a loooong period of time (Example: 95 years for the UK - WWI).

What is a war? A war is an armed conflict between two countries. It involves a bit more than dropping bombs on one another. It 'formally' starts and ends. The start is a declaration of war between countries. The END is debatable: surrender, military defeat or annihilation, victory. A 'properly' ended war is achieved through a peace process and declaration that may or may not include reparation, loss of territory, limitation on armed forces, change of government... A war involves armies, not civilians, in theory. When it involves civilian it is qualified 'total war' as in WWII where the civilians population and agglomerations where nearly bombed out of existence.

An armistice is not the end of a war but a temporary lull. WWI ended in an armistice (Versailles) not a peace treaty. The later was signed 21 October 1919.

'Formal' wars start with an 'old' technology and ends with the latest weaponry. WWI started with walking or mounted armies and ended with tanks (broke the stalemate and over powered machine guns). Gassing troops started with Germany and was used by both sides in the end. It was 'declared' illegal by the LON (League of nations), based in Geneva after the war. WWII started with a combination or air power and tanks and ended with the atomic bomb. The UN which replaced the LON and based in NY never declared the atom bomb as 'illegal'. A voluntary treaty of non proliferation was created instead. Not all countries are part of it.

Examples:
- WWII started with formal declarations of war. Japan's was a day late, after Pearl Harbor and the country was branded treacherous. It ended with formal war surrender. The USSR (Russia) and Japan NEVER formally ended it.
- Korean war, also considered the first UN 'Police' action. This war was really a revolution, like Vietnam. The difference is that China got involved and changed the 'police action' into a full scale war. This war is smoldering and has never been ended. We are still in Korea and of course still paying for the troops there so in effect it is the longest war for the US. Do not even mention 'cost' here.

Other wars:
'Cold war', term invented to describe the state of conflict between the East and the West. NATO and the Warsaw alliances defined who was on which side.
'Economical war', used to describe the financial tit for tat between countries. Was used against Japan during it's rise (1970's). Is currently alive and doing well between China and basically the rest of the world.
'Proxy wars' defined as a war between two countries, each side supported by other countries that otherwise would be in open warfare. The US and the USSR are notorious for doing that.

End result: a 'war' is not necessarily an open armed conflict but it is the generally accepted definition.

An armed conflict is a limited armed engagement with limited goals that do not involve the population (other than being by-standing victims).

A military intervention last at most a couple of days and has strict limits (Example: Student rescue in Grenada). Incredibly this takes place more often than we imagine and know. The first one for the US took place in Algeria to free US citizens from pirates. (Search for Barbary Pirates wars)

These two are under the 'Presidential power'.

Post is WAY too long but I do not see a simple answer.

Well for info, unlike it's predecessor this president asked congress BEFORE making a decision that does not seem to be taken lightly so your assumptions are wrong.

Also, for info, the congress committee stipulated that NO BOOTS were to touch the ground so we are basically looking at air strikes, not invasion. It also mandated that the intervention was to last 60 days and if 30 days were needed, it would be through congress again.

This is a far cry from a president running amok as the previous sh*t-head did.

Cost of it? Depending of the ordinance used and the potential loss of expensive aircraft it will be a minute fraction of the Iraq invasion.

As to the reasons, chemical weapons use is banned at the international level since the end of WWI (used first by Germany by the way). It is classified a war crime. I find something rather upsetting that when sad f*** was using them against Iran no one talked of bombing Iraq, instead we supplied that criminal with information, arms and whatever just to get back to Iran. Reaganomics and politics at work here... The previous VP was seen shaking sad f*ck hand...

Between war criminals after all, what are a few innocent lives?

http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

Interesting, I was not aware of this until you mentioned it.

I am not sure you understand the purpose of this entry...

It is to show that the RAW from Nikon is usable from ANY program BUT if you use the proprietary programs that usually come with the camera they will NOT allow for the transfer of the changes you make, hence the problem.

One typical example is that folks use the U-Point technology (NIK software*) to improve their pictures but then do not see their changes when using another software like PS to manipulate the image further for a photo montage (as an example).

The 'sibling' file of a RAW image capture is a *.XMP file, for info.

Also, anyone can convert from anything to anything, that is not the question nor an issue.

As to the CODECS, I hope we all know what those are and I also hope we all know that they need to be updated often or at the very least enough so that your camera pictures are usable... At the shell level that is.

In short your dismissive post offers nothing.

When I ask for comment(s) I ask for complementary information that can help understanding.

* Touted by Nikon as being the best in their literature. It indeed is a good software, as an add-on for Adobe but the pits is the time passed and lost lovingly preparing a picture to discover that all the changes are discarded BECAUSE the format is proprietary when using another 'normal' software like GIMP, PS CSx or whatever.

We are all aware that editing a JPG and saving it afterward is asking for trouble yet there is a small way out.

Here is a small trick:
For started you need a good post processing software.
Open the file, preferably the original JPG out of the camera.
Change the bit depth from 8 to 16
Save the file under another format that does not compress and keeps the 16bit color depth DNG will work but not BMP or PNG.

Explanation:
The data lost in the compression process is not retrieved, do not be fooled.
What happens when you change the bit depth is that each pixel gain in color depth but is not changed until you start post processing.
At that moment new data is created with billions of possible color shades vs a mere 24millions.
That alone will work against banding and color distortion when you export the end result to a JPG.

What this will not do:
Recreate details even if they appear to be due to the new color depth.
Prevent the further loss of data when exporting to JPG. There will be a loss in formation due to the compression as well as reduction in color depth yet on the later, the loss will smaller.

Comment please.

Yes, I know this has been discussed before but...

The trouble with NEF and a few other manufacturer's file format(s) is that some manufacturers like Nikon embed RAW information onto the RAW format. This information is read by their proprietary software (capture NX by example) and no one else.

This creates a 'double' standard. It does not do anything good or bad to the file or reduces the quality, it is annoying. The real difference is that when using something else than the proprietary software one has to process the picture all over again and in the process create a small RAW companion.

This is both tricky and a convenient way depending of how you deal with your pictures:
- To move your pictures and their 'corrected settings' you need to move the sibling file.
- To reset the pictures to their default, just delete the sibling file.