Check out Software and Computer Support for Photographers section of our forum.
Posts for: zigipha
Jul 17, 2016 15:46:59 #
SnappyHappy wrote:
It doesn't seem reasonable that a contract signed by the party of the first part could legally bind the party of the second part, who wasn't party to the contract in any part. Although if the photographer could produce a cash retainer you can bet the claim to damage would be litigated. Only in America. 
No it does not, but the guests are there at the invitation of the bride/groom, who can put conditions on attending.
The right way would have been to put this in the invite, but most likely the photographer got selected after the invitation went out.
The BG should have made the announcement, not the photographer.
All should have realized this is a dumb request.
How is the photographers revenue reduced if others take pics?
Jul 13, 2016 08:26:39 #
Maybe tone the white down a bit to be more grayish
Jul 10, 2016 12:38:09 #
Rongnongno wrote:
The ONLY remedial you have are:
- Contact a specialist (to gain back your PC access) or do it yourself if you know how.
- Report this number to the authorities
- Block this number from your phone - if you have this capability -.
Beside that, you are on your own.
The ONLY remedial you have are:
- Contact a specialist (to gain back your PC access) or do it yourself if you know how.
- Report this number to the authorities
- Block this number from your phone - if you have this capability -.
Beside that, you are on your own.
how would blocking the number from the phone prevent the ransom ware?
Check out Travel Photography - Tips and More section of our forum.
Jul 9, 2016 09:31:09 #
Jul 9, 2016 09:27:41 #
I was going to say, dial back the flash exposure compensation...that seems to be what you are looking for.
What would be really neat is this coudl all work ttl - the camera would sample and then set the power level for the off-camera flash and then have the on camera 1/4 power from that.
almost like you want the on-camera to be one of the flash groups
What would be really neat is this coudl all work ttl - the camera would sample and then set the power level for the off-camera flash and then have the on camera 1/4 power from that.
almost like you want the on-camera to be one of the flash groups
Jul 9, 2016 09:21:10 #
Billyspad wrote:
What can I say bro? lol
you can say the point you were trying to make.
Although a bit rambly, I got the sense that you were poking fun at the type of info that apflo was posting, and trying to educate your canine on its contents.
if so..wtf..say it aint so
This is a forum with some people having great depth of knowledge and experience in photography.
if you want a ladies tennis forum, you came to the wrong place.
Jul 8, 2016 09:50:47 #
kymarto wrote:
As I pointed out in another thread, if you want a stitched pano that covers the same field of view (so it ain't long and skinny) as a wide lens, you need to have extra vertical frames as well as horizontal. Sweep pano doesn't help there. Also, you ever do a sweep pano with things moving in frame?
wide angle will give you an aspect ratio 3:4 etc. horizontal pano will give an aspect ration 10:1. need horizontal and veritcal pano to get 3:4. Lots of work. maybe its worth it...
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
Jul 7, 2016 08:48:08 #
same - not showing for me; invalid uri
Jul 6, 2016 08:10:33 #
OnDSnap wrote:
Using a mono pod with such shallow DOF, (maybe a 1/4" or so) I think you could be swaying to and fro without realizing it ...also your breathing could be enough to cause the the rig to sway. Try using a tripod to eliminate the possibility of the above. At the very least, you'll eliminate a possible cause.
put the camera on a chair or table (stepstool) and try again see if the dof issue can be eliminated (does not matter the subject)
Jul 6, 2016 08:03:55 #
Two definition of lossless
1. Any loss in converting from one format to another (raw to tiff example). I think this has been covered in this discussion
2. Any loss in the "open/edit/save" cycle. If you open a JPG edit and then save, the saving of the working file to JPG will degrade the image (beyond the editing that you did). With 16-bit TIFF, this degradation is substantially/imperceptibility small; 8 bit would be noticeable.
LR is a lossless editor because it does not modify the source image when you edit it.
1. Any loss in converting from one format to another (raw to tiff example). I think this has been covered in this discussion
2. Any loss in the "open/edit/save" cycle. If you open a JPG edit and then save, the saving of the working file to JPG will degrade the image (beyond the editing that you did). With 16-bit TIFF, this degradation is substantially/imperceptibility small; 8 bit would be noticeable.
LR is a lossless editor because it does not modify the source image when you edit it.
Jul 6, 2016 07:58:42 #
BebuLamar wrote:
Thanks but still don't know why they use the 50mm lens both for the FX and DX format.
50mm on FF gives about the same angle of view as the eye (the part of the eye that can actually discern items, does not count peripheral view).
To follow the same analogy on DF, it should be 35mm (33.3 actually)
Don't know why they don't use 35 on DX
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
Jul 6, 2016 07:51:07 #
if you just want to store them as files, use google gdrive or microsoft onedrive. If you have office 365 you get 1TB of storage.
If you put your lightroom catalog and cache up there, you might be able to use lr in both places.
Note that each system (like dropbox) has dedicated storage on your local device and then syncs to the cloud in the background. So you get the speed benefit of local access
If you put your lightroom catalog and cache up there, you might be able to use lr in both places.
Note that each system (like dropbox) has dedicated storage on your local device and then syncs to the cloud in the background. So you get the speed benefit of local access
Jul 1, 2016 08:19:25 #
one of the batman movies showed this on his motorcycle..full speed with thread.
dont' tell me it can't be done..i saw it in a movie :)
dont' tell me it can't be done..i saw it in a movie :)
Jul 1, 2016 08:14:06 #
in my sony camera, its puts pictures shot on different days in different folders. So I would only import the new folders and not bother with the older ones.
Or what I do
1. using windows copy the sd card files to the destination directory
2. in LR import the hard disk folder, with just ADD
Before #2 you can sort the photos by date and delete the earlier ones (knowing they have already been imported)
Or what I do
1. using windows copy the sd card files to the destination directory
2. in LR import the hard disk folder, with just ADD
Before #2 you can sort the photos by date and delete the earlier ones (knowing they have already been imported)
Jul 1, 2016 08:07:09 #
16-300 lens - could be the optical limit of the lens. what focal length did you use for that shot?
try to shoot something that move away from you - like the top of a track, and see if you can get sharpness around your focus point
try to shoot something that move away from you - like the top of a track, and see if you can get sharpness around your focus point
Check out Landscape Photography section of our forum.