rjaywallace wrote:
Yes, and another recent post regarding astronomy photos suggests that using a simple bounce card attached to the flash and dialing the flash output down will enable you to ease shadows and improve contrast in outdoor portraits.
Given the nearest star is about 4.5 light years distant you would need a long shutter speed to utilize any bounced flash.
tradio wrote:
If it were not for RAW files, there would be no crime.
If there no RAW data, there would be no JPEG, TIFF, etc. Of course, this tells everyone what Reuters knows about binary digital files of any kind. There are raw data compressions in other files: such as audio, text, numbers.
Oh, how I wish I knew how to put this up on Facebook. The two are stark contrasts and almost defy ordinary words. The Iowa picture told much about life during the Great Depression.
bcheary wrote:
I will have to take your word for it since I have never used that filter. :-D
At the end of the quoted link is "using-polarizing-f...." so I thought the video would be demonstrating something concerning polarization. All the pictures shown were of the same scene, basically. None were side by side to show differences. After a few minutes I quit looking so didn't see the end.
Jakebrake wrote:
:thumbup:
Hey, Jakebrake - off topic, but did you know that some 25 years ago up in Duluth, Minnesota its main drag going up shore had signs the read: No Jakebraking. Those signs always floored me, cause I didn't have the foggiest idea of what they meant. Are you pretty famous for some foot action! :)
Isn't DNG an Adobe 'raw' designed specifically for Adobe software. When we say 'raw' we mean the exact binary string of '0's and '1's as recorded by the camera sensor. So when Adobe software makes a DNG out of your RAW, it is only rewriting the file header and does not tamper with the binary data string.
I wonder if there is a way to password protect an image file? Say, you post a much reduced thumbnail image. Like you start with an 8 by 10 at 300 pixels per inch and imbed a watermark. For posting, you use Photoshop to reduce the original to 2 by 2.5 at 72 pixels per inch. The first thing a thief will do is enlarge the size, increase the pixel density, and remove the watermark. Now to use it, the thief will have to 'Save' or 'Save As' or 'Print', so can these operations cause a 'password' entry. With no password entered or wrong password entered, is it possible to convert all bits to '0's. What we need is a binary code wizard to invent this and license its use for a fee. How many would buy into this. Protections even much more sophisticated than this must be available to our Federal security services.
ronichas wrote:
i would like to suggest, members here blast her with comments, share on fb, etc, that she is using copyright images that are not hers.
maybe, just maybe, she will realize this is a huge issue and will stop doing this. i have just posted a comment. if you want to do this, you do have to join zazzle to post a comment. i will also post this on fb!
anyone else with me????
http://www.zazzle.com/totallypaanimals/commentsLooks like Zazzle is a marketing site so they must be taking a cut of all sales made through the site. In trashing Zaz watch out you don't open yourself to a 'reputation' damages suit.
Are there any style of watermarks that are nearly impossible to eliminate? If so, patch them into your images.
Before you leap into suing for damages, you might try finding how deep her pockets are. If shallow, she won't have much to fork over. Another approach would be to find all her posting places, like Facebook, Twitter, etc, and telling that your photo is being used without permission and people should destroy their copies. Just a thought.
To me the video is inconclusive as to the effect of the polarizing filter. He might have shown images of 'null extinction' and 'full extinction.' Light reflected from surfaces will have nil, some, large polarized components which the filter can block when rotated in the 'cross' position.
May I take the 'shutterless' idea in another direction. In film days a shutter was necessary to admit just the right amount of light. But with an electronic sensor the charge carrier sites could be controlled by some sort of electronic switch, so that opening and closing the switch could acheive the same end that a shutter does. Of course, the detail of how such would work is complicated. For example, what you see in the LCD or EVF has to exist on the sensor first. When you flip the shutter, the resultant sensor charge state is oassed to a fkash memory card in the form of a binary array file.
Per the mymemories.com site the Mac OS requirement is 10.7.5 or higher. 10.7 is Lion. If I remember correctly Lion was the first OS to be operable only on rhe Mac Intel cpu. Mac and OS X version might be your problem.
To check the bellows; extend the front all the way, take of the back, and shine a bright flashlight inside and be in a darkened room. Watch for pinhole light leaks along the creases.
And this pic just proves that, while you and your dog are best friends, to your cat you are "staff."