Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: papakatz45
Page: <<prev 1 ... 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 next>>
Jul 31, 2012 21:16:23   #
The only problem with Lightroom is you can't do any advanced editing such as working with layers. For thus you need Photoshop or Photoshop Elements.

I think for the average photographer the best bang for the buck is Photoshop Elements then add Lightroom if you feel you need it's organization capabilities.

Any editing capabilities you have in Lighroom are in Elements and Elements gives you the advanced editing which Lightroom doesn't gave.

I use both programs so I am familiar with the capabilities of each.

Just my opinion.
Go to
Jul 31, 2012 20:06:14   #
Snert wrote:
I don't like the idea of having my stuff out of my control.
Use cloud storage that could fail just when you need it the most? It could go belly up anytime and what do they promise you?
I went with large capacity HDs. You can use 'em as externals (USB) and move them from one computer to another.


For those of you who don't like cloud storage, what are you going to do if you have a fire, flood or hurricane like we have here in south Florida?

Use external hard drive and cloud storage to cover all bases.
Go to
Jul 31, 2012 13:02:23   #
MagicFad wrote:
The only problem I can see with a "cloud" type storage is that they compress your files. That may not be too cool for photos.


Carbonite does not compress your data. It is a mirror image of your hard drive.
Go to
Jul 19, 2012 21:06:40   #
birdpix wrote:
I have the 10-22mm canon and it is a great lens. It is L quality glass without the price. Actually, since it is specifically for crop sensor cameras it can not carry the L designation.


No doubt it is a great lens but is that extra 7 mm of width worth the cost when I have the 17-55 already? Am I going to see that much of a difference between the two?

Thanks for your input.
Go to
Jul 19, 2012 14:52:50   #
Hi all. I currently have the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM which takes great pictures but sometimes I feel a little more wide-angle view would be nice. I am looking at the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM but don't know if going from 17 to 10 mm is worth the cost of the 10-22. I have a 50D camera now and am planning on a 7D by the end of the year. Any thoughts from you wise old Canon users? All my other lenses are L-series.
Go to
Jul 16, 2012 14:59:22   #
Thank you all. I will pass your info along to my friend.
Go to
Jul 15, 2012 11:20:43   #
I have a friend who has been given an old Nikon film camera with a number of different lenses. The camera does not work and he is not interested in fixing it. The question is, if he buys a digital Nikon can he use the older lenses with it?
Go to
Jul 7, 2012 13:33:19   #
BigBear wrote:
I believe your 28-300 is too short for the extender to attach to the lens.
The 100-400 will work fine depending which body you're using it on. When on my Canon D60 everything works fine except AF. When on my 50D even the AF works great.


Hi Big Bear,

I also have a 50D and 100-400. I have not been able to get the autofocus to work with the 1.4 extender. What do you have to do?
Go to
Jul 5, 2012 13:00:33   #
LARRYR. wrote:
Sorry, Sir but the Democrats say that I don't need
an I.D.(Illegal Democrate) card in order to vote
here in this great country of your's.


You are incorrect. Every state requires some type of identification when you go into vote. No one at any voting place can just walk in and vote without showing some form of ID.
Go to
Jul 5, 2012 13:00:30   #
LARRYR. wrote:
Sorry, Sir but the Democrats say that I don't need
an I.D.(Illegal Democrate) card in order to vote
here in this great country of your's.


You are incorrect. Every state requires some type of identification when you go into vote. No one at any voting place can just walk in and vote without showing some form of ID.
Go to
Jul 4, 2012 17:31:46   #
Richard94611 wrote:
Croce wrote:
Richard94611 wrote:
Robert,

Surely you know better than to make that comment. Or are you just being difficult. No, Robert. By requiring ID from elderly people or people who don't speak much English. These are generally people who have voted before, but who will show up again only to find that NOW they now haven't got the type of ID required. These are people who tend to vote Democratic rather than Republican, so the more of them you can prevent from voting, the better chance Republican candidates have of winning.

Shame on you, Robert. I am sure you already knew the above. But also you should also know that voter fraud has NEVER been a serious problem.

Again, this is a smokescreen under which partisan politics is being practiced.
Robert, br br Surely you know better than to make... (show quote)


Richard, Proof Richard proof. Where is your proof. Why should we accept what you have to say as opposed to what Robert has to say. Robert makes a simple and irrefutable postulation. If you are not willing to ID yourself as a qualified voter, you should not vote. The requirements are simple. Hell, I need ID to borrow a book from the library or to cash a check for $10. Do you deem those requirements oppressive also? You accuse Robert of shameful chicanery and lies but offer not one shred of evidence to support your position. And what do you accept as "voter fraud has NEVER been a serious problem". My definition is 1 single fraudulent vote is too many. Will we ever come to that point? Of course not. But it is irresponsible to not even try to eliminate it. ALL VOTER FRAUD IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM. Who in hell are you to set the parameter for what constitutes serious?
quote=Richard94611 Robert, br br Surely you know... (show quote)


Croce, let's talk about voter fraud and not try to deflect the discussion to libraries and check cashing. Statistically, voter fraud in Florida is not a serious problem. If you want to hold the absolutist position that one fraudulent vote is "serious," so be it. But if we had a city of several million people and there was only one burglary, we would not consider that burglary is a serious problem in that city.

Now, can I say it again loud and clear: No one is in favor of voter fraud here. Not Republicans. No Democrats. So stop waving that red herring in the air.

I, too, am a poll worker. We don't have to show an ID in California to vote. Vote fraud statistically is NOT a serious problem in my part of the world, and no one has presented statistics to show that it is in Florida, either. (If they have, tell us where to find the actual statistics.)

What we need to examine to make a judgement about this situation is not only what goes on at the polling places, but what goes on outside the polling places. The fact remains that many people most likely to vote Democratic -- elderly people and African-Americans, and especially elderly African-Americans -- do not drive, and hence lack a picture ID, which is what is required. These people tend to vote Democratic (and I am sure you know this).

Can you not see that statistically this skews the sample of who will vote ? The fewer African-Americans and the fewer elderly who vote, the greater chances Republicans have of winning. Or, rephrased another way, get rid of a certain percentage of your opposition and you will have a better chance of winning. Simple mathematics, not Republic or Democratic. However, the higher ups in the Republican Party are aware of this, which is why they are pushing voter ID requirements so vigorously.

Is voting by illegal aliens such as Mexicans and Central Americans statistically a significantly problem ion Florida elections ? No. Why ? Because illegal aliens don't want to put themselves into a position where they just might be caught being here illegally, and thus deported. Illegal aliens, by the very nature of their position in this country, tend to stay away from trying to vote.

To sum it up, the Republican Party wishes to scare away people who could vote legally but who would tend to vote for Democrats. I cannot explain it more clearly. If you don't wish to believe this, then just tell us you don't believe it and we don't need to have further discussions about this. I rest my case, and probably won't continue to contribute to this thread.
quote=Croce quote=Richard94611 Robert, br br Su... (show quote)


Wow, all elderly people are Democrat! I am 66 and my voter registration-card says non-partisan. I guess I need to get my card changed before election time.
Go to
Jul 4, 2012 11:55:11   #
Again, explain to me why we should not purge ineligible people from the voter list. Do you liberals think we should just allow anyone to vote? Just walk in and vote as often as you want to. Doesn't matter if you are citizen or not. Lets let the people from Canada and Mexico who live on the border and travel back and forth to vote.

Please explain to me why you think having only eligible citizen be allowed to vote is some how the wrong thing to do.

As a legally registered voter of Florida I want the laws followed and enforced. Anyone who is legally registered to vote had to show proof of residence when they applied for voter registration so it should be no problem now.
Go to
Jul 4, 2012 10:20:08   #
So let me get this correct, most of the people targeted by my Governor, I am a Floridian, are people who vote Democratic. So why is this? Are Democrats too stupid to be registered correctly or are Republicans just smarter?

I am registered nonpartisan.

Help me understand why anyone would be for allowing no-citizens to vote!
Go to
Jun 30, 2012 11:13:28   #
Just my two cents - if you don't have anything positive or constructive to say then stay off the airwaves!

If someone asks a question they are looking for an intelligent answer. Let us all try to remember this is a photo forum for people to learn and exchange information not a place to criticizes or belittle someone for what they do not know.
Go to
Jun 24, 2012 08:03:55   #
Look at Proshow Producer. It will do everything you need.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.