Dewman wrote:
I've got a couple of questions about a laptop I'm thinking about buying.
I have a couple of answers I'm thinking about giving.
Umm, lighting of the two objects is questionable in my humble opinion as is the obvious PP of the background of the plane. Come on guys/gal's, there's something else going on here. I'm no 'slouch' when it comes to this stuff, having being one of the early adopters of digitization, way back in 1986!
Well put. Given the number of people jailed or put to death over the years for crimes they did not commit, it makes perfect sense to me that the death penalty is nothing more than state sanctioned murder. Keep people alive (in prison) in order for them to reflect on their crimes or to defend themselves if they are victims of the corrupt system. As for the 72 virgins awaiting martyrs, nobody said that they were women :) I am retired now, but not from bashing bullies which I continue to enjoy (and I detest violence). They never 'get it'. Terrorists are nothing more than bullies, even using children to do their 'dirty work'. All bullies/terrorists are cowards! Unlike governments of today and 'political correctness', I still believe in the philosophy adopted in the 1970's - hijack a plane for example (red handed) and you will be shot to death escaping! I covered grey areas above, the right to appeal. I am well aware that this is a controversial topic and has little to do with photography, with the caveat that as photographers, we think :) Bullies/terrorists don't.
Not questioning Railfan Bill, but I agree too. It has clearly been dodged and the lighting on the building vs the lighting on the plane don't appear to match, suggesting that they could be two separate images. Just commenting on what I see. I don't see a lens or filter issue!
phil7782 wrote:
Good to know...
But will I be able to understand what it's telling me?
http://www.howtogeek.com/166911/reliability-monitor-is-the-best-windows-troubleshooting-tool-you-arent-using/
Phil
Thanks Phil! We can never seem to have enough tools such as this one when things start to give us grief.
silver wrote:
All you have to do is use live view and the mirror is already up.
Doh! So obvious I missed it! It is true that sometimes the little things have a big impact, as this certainly will have for me. Great tip, thanks
:thumbup:
pounder35 wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/embed/ie3SrjLlcUY
Astounding. An iconic airplane for me. Wonderful to see a human connection to the legend of the plane, more so the legend of the rarely heard pilot!
cloverleaf wrote:
Why can't the type of camera and the settings used be part of the posting for everything in the photo gallery? I so admire some of the incredible pictures I see, and some just don't loo sharp enough but are still pleasing, but I always want to know, what kind of camera, and what were the settings, even is it was just "auto". Can't that be a stipulation for every published picture?
The settings will come to you. The rest will follow if you stick with it. As for the type of camera, who cares! It is about you, transpiring what you see to the rest of us. How you see it. Creatively.
Remoman wrote:
I have a serious question and I would like your opinion and reason for it.
I have been told by several people that it is impossible to be a Christian unless one is also a Republican.
How say you and why?
You said you had a serious question. I took the time to look. Honor your heading and provide something of substance. As for my opinion, perhaps it's time you started to think, for yourself.
ratzthree wrote:
Hey hoggers! Any help with this is appreciated.
I have a Canon T3i. My LCD screen has a spot on it from my nose. (I wear a lot of make up.) I have used glass and LCD screen cleaner but can't get it off. It doesn't affect my pics I realize. It just bugs me.
Are there any ways to remove tough spots off the LCD screen?
Thanks!
You might consider purchasing a relatively inexpensive stick on screen protector to avoid such events reoccurring. They seem to be more durable than the LCD screen itself. I have four different screens and after 12 months have only wiped them with the palm of my hand to clean them. I have not yet had to replace them! Cheap invisible insurance.
JR1 wrote:
May be of interest to people
http://www.lenstip.com/115.1-article-Polarizing_filters_test.html
Thanks, very useful, though the maths did my head in!
jimbof wrote:
http://photosilke.blogspot.co.at/2013/03/historic-pictures-restored.html
Wow! I have had my head down for months studying photography. Not feeling that I was getting anywhere in particular, though I was on my way to recognize that print was the destination.
Then I actually looked at these photos in the link. Studied them! Putting myself in the shoes of the photographer. The lens used. The lighting. From composing the shot until the final print from the darkroom, after getting it 'right'.
And I reached a moment of epiphany! All of a sudden it all came together for me where I understood the art of photography. The destination. The print. Where the photographer saw the end result before they pressed the shutter button. In B&W! Back to basics, I love it.
Gina wrote:
Photo Printer update. I decided on the Epson Stylus Pro 3880. 2bob, I also bought the book you recommended by Ron "Sheppard." Thank you all for your expertise. I could not have gone wrong with any of the recommendations. :thumbup:
Glad I was able to help. For me, Ron Sheppard's book took me back full circle, back to the darkroom where it all began. In the days of film it was all about the print. I am so glad to have rediscovered the joy of watching a print come to life! Since reading this book, when I take a photo now I am being mindful of the final print! Overall, my prints are streets ahead of what they were before.
Glad to hear that you have settled on a printer, great choice
:thumbup: