Posts for: DirtFarmer
Apr 20, 2024 13:38:49 #
Racmanaz wrote:
What does your response have to do with the subject?
It’s just there to stir the pot.
Apr 20, 2024 13:37:19 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Do we really have to told that a download does not cost money? "Free Download" is all over the Internet, but it's meaningless. It's often difficult to see what the actual price is - until you download it.
It’s not meaningless. The meaning is fairly clear. What it is is misleading. Typical marketspeak. It makes you THINK the product is free. It’s probably not.
Apr 20, 2024 13:23:36 #
KillroyII wrote:
… If I could edit the post I would title it "cartoon - just laugh" and have no text in the body of the message.
In my experience you can’t have no text in the body of the message. UHH complains “no text”. If I have no appropriate words I just stick in a period. It’s fairly unobtrusive.
Apr 20, 2024 13:17:00 #
The original dates from around 850AD so I think the copyright has expired. Roughly translated: “that passed, may this also”.
Apr 20, 2024 11:05:21 #
I collect cartoons from the internet. I send them to a zoom lunch group that I am a member of. I see this as being within the fair use provision of the copyright. I don’t profit from the use.
So is there a significant difference between a zoom lunch group and a forum? No monetary gain in either case.
So is there a significant difference between a zoom lunch group and a forum? No monetary gain in either case.
Apr 20, 2024 10:11:23 #
The title appears to support the SOOC view of photographic philosophy. Ignoring the completely irrelevant subthread I view this as a normal UHH occurrence.
I view SOOC as a personal choice and as such is neither right nor wrong on the whole. For me, it is wrong, but I am not in charge.
I view SOOC as a personal choice and as such is neither right nor wrong on the whole. For me, it is wrong, but I am not in charge.
Apr 20, 2024 09:42:27 #
How about publishing a link (URL) to the cartoon? That provides attribution to the source.
Apr 18, 2024 21:13:37 #
I gave away the D200 and the lens to a kid who was interested in photography about 10 years ago.
Apr 18, 2024 21:06:59 #
I got that lens for my first DSLR, a D200. I used it for a few years until I got a D3. I had to get FX glass then so I sprung for a 70-200.
I found then that the 70-200 was noticeably sharper than the 18-200. But the 18-200 was a nice lens for flexibility and range. I got a 28-300, which the equivalent for FX. It’s great for casual work but for important shots I use the 24-70 or 70-200.
The biggest problem with the 18-200 was creep. I got a rubber band and put it around the lens barrel to minimize the creep.
I found then that the 70-200 was noticeably sharper than the 18-200. But the 18-200 was a nice lens for flexibility and range. I got a 28-300, which the equivalent for FX. It’s great for casual work but for important shots I use the 24-70 or 70-200.
The biggest problem with the 18-200 was creep. I got a rubber band and put it around the lens barrel to minimize the creep.
Apr 16, 2024 20:09:05 #
Depends on what I'm matching. I'm not always trying to match the same thing, and the matching attempts are rare. (and I'm really bad at keeping records).
My post was really directed at NJFrank, who said that work flow steps are a personal choice. I was agreeing with him. I generally approach every image de novo when it comes to processing. I don't try A first, then B.....
My post was really directed at NJFrank, who said that work flow steps are a personal choice. I was agreeing with him. I generally approach every image de novo when it comes to processing. I don't try A first, then B.....
Apr 16, 2024 19:30:36 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
Take each photo and each circumstance as unique? So, if I try to match up three news photos into a similar "look," I can just forget what worked (or didn't) with these?
My workflow is mine. Your workflow may well differ. No problem.
I will admit that occasionally I will try to match images in some way.
Apr 16, 2024 19:13:13 #
NJFrank wrote:
I think work flow steps are a personal choice. If you watch enough YouTube videos on the subject, all the presenters have their own steps. Seem some say to Denise first. Others do it last. As one example.
As for your three images I think you succeeded.
As for your three images I think you succeeded.
I have a set work flow from shutter click to LR import. It places meaningful file names on the files and loads them into a well defined folder structure, loads them into LR and backs everything up.
Once it's in LR, it's free form from there. No fixed workflow. Stochastic.
Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
Apr 16, 2024 16:50:49 #
Reuss Griffiths wrote:
I posted a comment just above yours on the top of page 4 on how to get GPS coordinates from your cellphone and use them to bring people to you like a tow truck, 911, any other type of emergency. You can use it to find your car in a big parking lot or whatever. I also included some comments an putting GPS coordinates into your cellphone. Check it out.
If you want to refer to a specific post, look at the top line of your post, where your name is. On the right side there is a '#'. That is a link to that specific post. Click on that and it will load your post (along with the others in the thread. The URL of that post will be displayed in your browser. You can copy that and direct someone to that specific post. It doesn't have to be in this thread or even in this section.
Your post is at https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-804749-4.html#14569459
Apr 16, 2024 04:11:12 #
Flyerace wrote:
There are so many programs out there that you can ... (show quote)
It is always good to be in danger of learning something new.
Apr 14, 2024 13:11:11 #
imagemeister wrote:
Raw is a religion and NOT for beginners IMO.
If everyone thought that way, nobody would ever learn to use raw.
One has to risk failure to learn anything. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.