Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: kimberliswenson
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
Nov 17, 2011 11:39:04   #
I actually appreciate this! I offer my clients a CD of their images with my logo as proofs....this policy protects me from the client just going to Wally World and reprinting the proofs and displaying my images with the lower quality printing and not ordering good prints from me.


BBNC wrote:
Traditionally, it has NOT been the business of a photo processor to be concerned about copyright issues, which actually lie with the photographer or person using the image for commercial purposes. The next thing will be requiring model releases from people who live in other countries, or are dead (some of my 50 year old slides taken in Europe).

Here is an excerpt from Walmart's arcane policy.

"In addition, we will not copy a photograph that appears to have been taken by a professional photographer or studio, even if it is not marked with any sort of copyright, unless we are presented with a signed Copyright Release from the photographer or studio."

The link is to Walmart's form.

http://i.walmartimages.com/i/if/hmp/fusion/Photo-CopyrightForm_Owner.pdf
Traditionally, it has NOT been the business of a p... (show quote)
Go to
Nov 9, 2011 13:58:45   #
Thanks guys....the logo is there as a watermark for their proofs, so they can't just go out and print them willy nilly. It is supposed to be in an annoying area....it was suggested that I actually put it over the main focal point in the image.
I suppose I can move or change it for the purposes of this website.
Go to
Nov 8, 2011 14:01:37   #
My first "Baby Portrait" set up....
Nikon D7000
Nikkor 24-85mm
Cheap constant lights with umbrellas on either side
NO flash
Laundry basket and pink blankie
Curtain as backdrop
Faux fur as backdrop
Shot on client's living room floor

Crocodile Tears


Little Princess


Nah Nuh Nah, Nuh Na, Na


Rasberries!!

Go to
Nov 8, 2011 13:45:44   #
I would contact Adobe and request another download. Do you still have your license key? They may be able to look you up by your personal information if you registered the program...as expensive as it is...it is worth a try!!


yolandacrosby wrote:
MWAC wrote:
what editing software are you using?


currently I am using an online editor. Its all I have, I had CS4 and had a hard drive crash and no longer have it.
Go to
Nov 7, 2011 22:45:26   #
It looks like your camera is focusing on something in the background. Check your autofocus settings and make sure you are focusing on the child's face. What camera are you using? Both of my Nikon's allow me to move the area of focus by using the arrow keys on the back...the red box that indicates the focus area moves as I move the keys...make sure the "red box" is over the area you want to be the main focus point on the image.

Elizabeth23 wrote:
Setting on this was:
1/200 F/4.8 ISO 200
Go to
Nov 7, 2011 22:39:57   #
There is a photographer in my neck of the woods that does this continually...weddings, engagemets, seniors....and she is BUSY!! I don't get it myself. I think she even does some of it in post production. I agree, this looks totally blown out and just isn't good photography. But....some people seem to like it, because she posts new clients daily and charges an arm and a leg for her services. It is all a matter of taste, I guess. Not may taste, though.



SDav612 wrote:
SDav612 wrote:
There are a couple of "pro" photographers in my area that like to take photos of people with the sun in the photo, usually near their head. The sun blows out the shot and sometimes you can't even see their face. I think it looks hideous, but wanted opinions from others. If you don't understand what I am talking about, maybe I can reproduce and post.



This is one, but there is another photographer that is much, much worse.
Go to
Nov 4, 2011 22:56:58   #
I am not sure, but I think that I read that it was new to Lightroom 3. I didn't have 2, so I can't say for sure.


Bobbee wrote:
kimberliswenson wrote:
I just did this for the first time at a school carnival and used Lightroom 3. It was very simple and worked great...plus I could instantly run a couple of actions and export the file to my desktop and then burn it to a cd for the kids....the whole process took about 4 minutes. (My burner is a little slow..)
I couldn't have been happier with the results!


JohnnyRottenNJ wrote:
I have an application where viewing the photos through the display on the rear just doesn't cut it. I would like to tether a Nikon D300 via USB cable to my PC based laptop, running Windows 7, 64 bit. I have been looking at the various software programs, that range from "free" (that word always scares me in the photography/computer world) up to about $200.00

Can anyone suggest a decent software program? I have read some of the blogs, and it seems the free programs have a tendency to freeze up or make your computer crash. I think it would be neat to be able to take some photos and see them enlarged right out of the gate.

PS: for anyone considering doing this, remember that the images get stored ONLY on your laptop
I have an application where viewing the photos thr... (show quote)
I just did this for the first time at a school car... (show quote)


Is this only Lightroom 3 or is that in 2 also.
quote=kimberliswenson I just did this for the fir... (show quote)
Go to
Nov 4, 2011 13:17:20   #
I just did this for the first time at a school carnival and used Lightroom 3. It was very simple and worked great...plus I could instantly run a couple of actions and export the file to my desktop and then burn it to a cd for the kids....the whole process took about 4 minutes. (My burner is a little slow..)
I couldn't have been happier with the results!


JohnnyRottenNJ wrote:
I have an application where viewing the photos through the display on the rear just doesn't cut it. I would like to tether a Nikon D300 via USB cable to my PC based laptop, running Windows 7, 64 bit. I have been looking at the various software programs, that range from "free" (that word always scares me in the photography/computer world) up to about $200.00

Can anyone suggest a decent software program? I have read some of the blogs, and it seems the free programs have a tendency to freeze up or make your computer crash. I think it would be neat to be able to take some photos and see them enlarged right out of the gate.

PS: for anyone considering doing this, remember that the images get stored ONLY on your laptop
I have an application where viewing the photos thr... (show quote)
Go to
Nov 3, 2011 13:15:18   #
This is exactly right. Single point for portraits, dynamic for landscapes, and tracking for sports or really fast toddlers at play! Good luck...newborns are the greatest. Make sure the area you are working in is comfy and warm, an no flash...constant lights or really good lighting in the room.



Eugene wrote:
I, like snowbear' am no expert by any strech of imagination. However, if I understand the subject, 3d is more for sports (moving objects). Dynamic is to be used in situations where there are possible multiple focus points and you let the camera decide which point it wants to use. Therefore (if I'm correct) the single point would be best for portraits. If I'm wrong please forgive me and maybe a true expert will alos give advise and straighten me out also.
Go to
Nov 3, 2011 12:27:07   #
Couldn't have said it better myself.


lleach wrote:
Hi, Folks

Rene, you may want to pick up the dummies book on human relations...

For others, I just want to share some thoughts on the D5100. It probably relates as well to the competitors such as the Canon T3i.

Just so Rene doesn't accuse me of being a dummy also I'll let you know I graduated 3rd in class from one of the best engineering colleges in the country, have two masters degrees, have written several books on engineering related topics, etc. My work experience has been in research and development and the design, construction and operation of nuclear power plants. For those that do not know it is a field somewhat more complex than rocket science.

I have had cameras all my life including a 35 mm SLR for over twenty years and many versions of electronic cameras since.

I am also new to the D5100. I take a slightly different approach having carefully reviewed not only the printed manual that came with the camera but the multihundred page one on the DVD that came with it. I carefully reviewed the video on the DVD several times. I have purchased and read two additional books on the D5100 and three on digital photography and taken one of Scott Kelby's short courses (on the D3100, but close enough that I learned much from it.)

The main thing I want to share is that I consider the D5100 to be the most complex and sophisticated machine I have ever worked with. It is going to be a long time before I will feel that I have mastered it.

That said, it is also an astonishingly elegant machine in that if you set it on "Auto" (including turning on the lens autofocus) it takes great pictures right out of the box in most situations.

Next choice is to use P which also pretty much assures you great pictures. Then you can move to the next level of built-in set up options such as scenery and portrait. After that you can move to taking more control with A and S options. In all of those you can also fiddle with stuff like color control and white balance. Then you can take more control with M (oh, yeah, I also took a course last month from community educattion that helped on that...although in my case that was what I was best at because I had done it for 20 years with my SLR). We haven't even touched on things like HDR and Active D-lighting, bracketing and focus and metering choices, etc. And then there is video.

I am well beyond using it in Auto and still manage to take what I consider great pictures most of the time using some of its other capabilities. I still have much to learn about all of its incredible power and about composing better pictures...something the starter of this thread already seems to know better than I as he demonstrated with the wonderful picture of his granddaughter.

I note he has gone silent on us so I suppose we have given him what he needs.

Regards,
Larry Leach

rene wrote:
i'm sorry people, but i agree with nevada chuck. you guys gave tramsey lots of great advice but almost all of it means nothing because this guy doesn't know a thing about photography. he thought buying a good camera would make good pictures but we all know that's not how it works. look, he gave up in less than a month. now on his behalf, that saleman ripped him off. he could have started him on a lesser camera. he probably said he would "grow into it". the guy is 80. and a stubborn 80 at that. he never even bought a book and thought he could take a few lessons and that would be enough.

tramsey, the best advice everyone gave you was to get the book for dummies. start off on page 1 and don't go onto page 2 until you understand page 1. do this everyday. pick up your camera every day and take a few pictures and apply what you have learned. before you know it you will have finished your book and you will understand your camera.
you may be old and stubborn, but you are capable of learning. you will not learn everything you need to learn in a month, but if you stick with it, in a year you will be much further toward your goal. and also...join a club. just like this site has so much to offer, so do other clubs. books are great, but there is nothing like one on one interaction for really learning something.
and lastly...don't stick your camera in anyone face. it never makes for a happy subject. use a lense that lets you be back a ways and gives your subject some breathing room.
you have a lot to learn, but it will be good for you to learn this. don't give up on your equipment or yourself. you just have to learn things the right way...from the beginning. good luck tramsey!!
ps....photoshop is a very hard program to learn. to learn them both at once will be quite a feat.
i'm sorry people, but i agree with nevada chuck. y... (show quote)
Hi, Folks br br Rene, you may want to pick up the... (show quote)
Go to
Nov 2, 2011 22:40:05   #
Could be the info from the memory card??

rone wrote:
Tooth Maker wrote:
Here is some info on Tramsey's photo. See if anyone can use it to advise him.

[Image]
Make = Panasonic
Model = DMC-FZ20
Orientation = top/left
X Resolution = 72
Y Resolution = 72
Resolution Unit = inch
Software = Ver1.0
Date Time = 2009-12-23 12:03:55
YCbCr Positioning = co-sited
Exif IFD Pointer = Offset: 418
PrintIM Data = 208 Byte

[Camera]
Exposure Time = 1/15"
F Number = F2.8
Exposure Program = Normal program
ISO Speed Ratings = 200
Exif Version = Version 2.2
Date Time Original = 2009-12-23 12:03:55
Date Time Digitized = 2009-12-23 12:03:55
Components Configuration = YCbcr
Compressed Bits Per Pixel = 4
Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
Max Aperture Value = F2.83
Metering Mode = Pattern
Light Source = unknown
Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Focal Length = 18.1mm
Maker Note = 5724 Byte
Flashpix Version = Version 1.0
Color Space = sRGB
Exif Image Width = 2560
Exif Image Height = 1920
Interoperability IFD Pointer = Offset: 6652
Sensing Method = One-chip color area sensor
File Source = DSC
Scene Type = A directly photographed image
Custom Rendered = Normal process
Exposure Mode = Auto exposure
White Balance = Auto white balance
Digital Zoom Ratio =
Focal Length In 35mm Film = 109mm
Scene Capture Type = Normal
Gain Control = Low gain up
Contrast = Normal
Saturation = Normal
Sharpness = Normal

[Interoperability]
Here is some info on Tramsey's photo. See if anyon... (show quote)


Can someone tell me why Toothmakker & my software says the photo was shot with a Panasonic, but he said he had a NIKON 5100?
quote=Tooth Maker Here is some info on Tramsey's ... (show quote)
Go to
Nov 2, 2011 09:28:18   #
Thank you! There is so much packed into that program, I wouldn't have been surprised if there was an "option" that I was missing somewhere. :)

tkhphotography wrote:
sorry so late in answering your question; I work nites and just got home at 4 am.

What I meant to say was click on the options window's little square ....not click it "off." Under that window you will find various options when using the brush tool.
Go to
Nov 1, 2011 17:55:03   #
I appreciate yet another way to see how to do this, and I see how to do everything in your directions, except for "click the options check-off" Where is the "options" located?

I have CS4....

tkhphotography wrote:
Open your image in the editor, press "control-j" (or under layer menu choose "new"-"layer via copy". Press "B" (click on the Brush tool), click the options check-off and the mode to "color". Press "D" to set the foreground color to black and 'paint' away all the stuff you don't want to be colored. If you make a mistake, click the eraser tool and "re-paint" the parts you messed up on then go back to the 'brush tool' and finish removing the color.

good luck
Open your image in the editor, press "control... (show quote)
Go to
Nov 1, 2011 15:26:00   #
MH wrote:
Nice explanation !!!


I ALWAYS need things explained to me very simply....sometimes what makes sense to you doesn't always make sense to someone else.
Go to
Nov 1, 2011 14:43:41   #
Wow, I have been doing it the hard way! That is why I love this forum....so many people to learn from!!



MH wrote:
Open both pictures in PS. With the marquee tool make a full selection of the B & W picture. Select copy and then paste it into the color pic. You should have two layers now with the B & W on top. Withe the earser tool draw over the pumkin or what ever you want to colorize. This should get you where you want to be. Hope you don't mind but I tried it on the two pics you posted....
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.