Cool. Thanks. I'll go have a look.

[quote=tainkc][quote=gessman][quote=tainkc][quote=gessman]

I'll go see if I can find your butterflies. It sure isn't hard to fire off some shots. I used to try to do that with film and it almost caused me a divorce a couple of times. We're all learning in here and that's a good thing, well all of us but a couple and it's really good that they're in here. I'm grateful. Later.

Thank you Linda. I've toned down the goose as you'll see. As for the merganser, I've got to see if I can find my sequence of that to see what's available to me.

Before...


After...

Thank you and absolutely, I'd like to see your vision of the goose. I'm not a very artistic person and am open to all suggestions. Thanks again.

Ya know, I was just about to ask him to post some of those "tack sharp" shots from that lens. I'd like to see them. One other quick point about equipment - those sites that test lens and show you the graphs and curves - what you want is a side by side actual shot for shot comparison and you can get that at www.luminous-landscape.com in many, not all, instances. I am in no way associated with that site except as a fan and appreciator of the man's efforts. I wouldn't buy a piece of equipment without seeing if he'd tossed it up against its nearest competitors in a "shootout." His methodology is clear, correct, and his results are apparent and believable. "L" glass cost an arm and a leg. Get what you pay for. He tells it like it is. I keep saying this and hope I'm not becoming a nuisance about it but I can't stress it enough.

I didn't mention flash memory because, although getting better, the cost has been fairly prohibitive to use as a backup/storage medium from my perspective. I haven't heard just yet what the manufacturers are claiming probably due to the fact that I've not been paying attention, but it would probably be real good as long as it is totally safe from natural disasters, fires, floods, etc. I do know that it has to be superior to hard drives that are kept in service over a long haul because there are no moving parts which is often what affects hard drives, bearings, etc. It's much more fool and fail proof than anything up to now but, as I said, I haven't noticed how far we can expect it to take us into the future. My guess that it would be a long time, if not permanent. Good thinking if you've got the bucks.

I did have a mishap recently with a 16 gig card. I pushed it into my reader and didn't think it had seated so I gave it another push and it snapped right in the middle, not into two, but bent and broken. Now, it shows me that it's a 6.5 gig card but won't format. So, like anything in life, if you tend to be a little stout, be extra gentle and don't push too hard. If it doesn't seem like it went in right, pull it back out and do it again - as many times as necessary to ensure you're not breaking anything. I can't give you an estimate how many time you may have to do that, but you'll figure it out without my help, I'm sure.

I didn't overlook those but, like our original poster about this, ThomasS said, he wants one that can handle a stack loader and work without being hand fed one at a time and unless I missed it somewhere, the Dimage is a single feeder - not what was asked for. I don't know about all other scanners but I did answer his question with what knowledge I do have.

Thank you sir. I agree about that ol' goose. It just wasn't very exciting. I've got to remember to get in there and see if I can tone it down a little and see how it looks. Digital really does some unusual things to some images compared with film, which I suppose did some equally but different things almost as strange as digital. You're up a little late tonight. Seems like several folks are up late on the forum, more so at this hour than I think I've previously seen. Wonder what's troubling folks so they can't sleep.

I'm heading for the sack soon myself. Got to go see my cardiologist in the morning early and don't want to be all tired out. He'll want to slap me in the hospital and shoot me full of fluids. :-) Can't have that. I'd miss the next chapter of "As the Ugly Hedgehog Turns." 'night.

[quote=tainkc][quote=gessman][quote=tainkc][quote=gessman]

Why, my friend, I can't tell that at all. I'm just an old geezer having a little fun here and there and don't intend to do anyone any harm. I've been looking at your pics and you're doing some really good stuff. Don't worry about me. There's folks in here who's knowledge is so far superior to mine that I try to let them get their 2 cents worth in and I only step in if they fail to do so. I couldn't decide which way I liked the flower either and that's why I posted the options I thought were most reasonable. As we say nowadays, "it's all good!"

It seems to be a tossup between 1 & 3. No crop occurred except in the camera on those two. I just had my lens too far down in the flower for your liking. I can see what you mean and maybe next time I'll get a shot for you and then one for me. :-) How's that. Thanks again.

I like it a lot. That appears to be 1955-56 Schwinn Traveler 3-speed disguised as a John Deere bicycle, an item of which I have never heard. I did have a Schwinn Traveler though. I bought the first one that came into Arkansas. Again, at the risk of repeating myself, I was a Western Union messenger. I had my bike on order for almost a year as soon as the were announced. It was like a going on vacation after that 50 pound thing I rode up to then. That's a real piece of history someone is letting go to rack and ruin. "The Pickers" on the History Channel would go nuts for that.

Nice! I see your point. Stands out. As for the Audi, those are lawn sculptures and we use commodes and bathtubs for planters in my "Hill William" home state of Arkansas. Thanks Ugly. Dinner is usually ready around 6 mountain time here in my transplanted home of Denver. You're welcome any time.

Thanks. I'd like to see what it looked like as you corrected it. I use Elements 2 I've had for years and know nothing about PS and "high pass." Have no idea what it does. I've been hunting a reason to get PS but I really don't do all that much editing. Give me a reason. I'm serious. Thanks.

Good idea. I don't have 9 - have been using 2 for years. Don't recall running into stitching but I think I have a stitching program. In fact, I think some of the Canon software that came with my camera allows that. I really don't play with my pics very much. I tend to spend too much time shooting when not doing this. I just don't know if I have the image back to the first touchdown point. That water patters isn't probably going to be easy to match up. Would be a good puzzle, eh? I, too, am retired so time isn't an issue with me either. Thanks and I'll see if I can't pursue it further.

Thanks. FuzMuz just before you made a very good point in that he/she felt it would be even better if I could re-crop to show the entire trail from the time the bird first hit the water and then draw her back to the lower right junction of the 3rds rule. As I told FuzMuz, I don't recall cropping this shot but it was part of a sequence and I may have gotten the whole slide in zone or not. I also don't remember panning but I may have. I'm going to try to dig out my other shots in the sequence and see if I have that. I like your crop and the way you brought the bird closer even if it is an unconventional dimension. Thanks again.