I'll offer my humble opinion and hopefully some more experienced will join me, especially if I appear to be wrong. If your pictures were not fuzzy before and if they're not fuzzy other than those taken at the game with the zoom, it sounds like "pilot error" to me. There is no way that erasing or formatting the card will cause fuzzy pictures. I could sound a lot less resolute about that and maybe should, but I don't feel that way. Me thinks you screwed up at the old ball game.

but... but... but, #1 is the way nature intended. Have we no respect for mother nature. I hear that can cause a problem. You're right, of course. Thank you for taking the time to comment. I appreciate it.

Thanks Ian. I'm ambivalent about it. I think it looks fair either way but then our gooey minds sometimes won't let go of the way we originally saw it and sometimes we think that's the only way it should be. Of course, it could even look good upside down 'cept usually when we see that flower it's not upside down.

It's good to have friends sometimes. I appreciate your willingness and hope you're back where you want to be soon. Thanks.

I know, and that's the way I took it, totally. I can't go back there because those shots were all made with equipment I'm disinclined to shoot with and my interests have changed a lot from then. While I thoroughly enjoyed my time doing that, I'm enjoying my time equally as much or more doing what I'm doing now and the urge to live in the past hasn't hit me yet. I will, as I said, try to retain your valued comments in future situations. My mind is only broadening at a time when I hear it's supposed to be shutting down. I heard you loud and clear. Thanks.

I thought it was a color image all along. I guess you missed my early rant about selective color. I'm not a fan of selective coloring and you've very succinctly demonstrated why. It robs of us the authenticity and natural value of those rare moments when that spontaneously occurs in nature. It steals from us those genuine occurrences. If we continue along those lines, it seems that we are headed in the same direction that those companies are going in that are utilizing generated graphics in their commercials rather than paying people to make the commercials - another worthwhile industry that puts people to work that doesn't represent an improvement of life. Ahead of us, I think I'm seeing a time when we won't even have to have cameras. We will be able to do it all on a computer. How will we like that?

Some folks in our lovely forum are being a little flippant and somewhat disrespectful of the group as a whole. They're critiquing images without benefit of reading the entire post and thereby putting themselves in a position of missing the whole point, in addition to posting what several others have already said. Is that what this is all about, or should we not comment unless we read everything that's been said? IMHO, it would seem to be of more benefit and cut down on a lot of excess reading, that desires the time to reply, if each of us could just refrain from commenting if the poster's original questions have already been adequately replied to in cases dealing with mere mechanics. If it's a matter of philosophy, that's another different - I feel everyone should contribute who feels like it. I could voluntarily withdraw and stand a lot less involvement but I don't want to do that and yet I'm spending a lot of time answering the same comments multiple times. Folks commenting without reading the other posts is contributing to that. I don't want to be rude and appear to be ignoring anyone but that's happening because I can't get around to everyone. What do you think?

I've been duped! Again! :-)

You're never wrong in my mind even if your choose to go the wrong way on the LA Freeway if that was your intentions. It wouldn't be mine but...

Thank you. Your comments were right on and I appreciate them. That's what I'm doing in this forum, seeing if I can provoke others thoughts so that I may improve my own. The frailty of only being able to view the final image as a stand alone issue sometimes overlooks the other issues that factored into an image from the outset but ultimately, an image has to stand alone without respect for what went into the making of it. Thanks again.

I could avoid this and perhaps my esteem would remain on a higher plane but in reality, the timing was totally serendipitous. You overestimate me. I do only go out to shoot early morning and late evening but didn't figure on the water.

Well, your hair is wavy and you have a look of savoir faire about you, you aren't in driving around in a pickup or huge suv for protection, what else do those of us who fit that description drink, since we've all seen the commercials?
:)

Thank you. Taken in '99 with my first roll of Velvia 50 slide film in a new camera, scanned in later, and you bet, in hindsight... Thanks again.

Although I've not used it yet, as best I recall, my EOS 5D MkII has that feature and if ever back on that site I'll try to remember that but these pics were taken on slide film with an EOS 5, grey market version of the A2E, and I'm not finding D Lighting as a feature. I probably need to study that as a separate issue 'cause there may have been a similar feature on that camera that was called something else at that time. This was my first roll of Velvia, or any other kind of film that went through that camera and I don't really remember all that much about the various features. I'll check it out, and thanks.

Obviously not a dull man. I did a BSA, a Norton, and a couple of others. Do you drink Dos Equis?

That's sure a thought. Makes me think, could you bracket with film, scan in 3 to 5 slides to produce the digi necessities and then HDR those. I don't see why not. You may have me considering digging out some old slides. I didn't toss the toss-able ones, just put 'em in another place and didn't scan 'em in when I did what were my preferences. That may be a whole 'nuther hobby. By golly, I think you're onto something TomD. Thanks. I've yet to do my first HDR but it isn't long before...