Photoshop How To Use: rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 8 topics

rec.photo.digital
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photomatix & HDR (REDUX)
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/438bde75c5450595?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 5:57 pm
From: "BobS"

"Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt about it now."
<nocontact@noaddress.com> wrote in message
news:j16f45p721kjirj00d75if2s7eoa2s3ret@4ax.com...

Wow......what an ass.

What part of "You're not welcome here" did you not understand?

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 8:26 pm
From: l v

Savageduck wrote:
> On 2009-06-29 08:38:11 -0700, bugbear
> <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> said:
>
>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>
>>> Well just so you can see what I was working with here are the 3
>>> exposures resized only, no PP:
>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1119w.jpg
>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1120w.jpg
>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1121w.jpg
>>
>> Hmm; Im not really seeing any major difficulties in that
>> last exposure, but just to show willing I put the images
>> through hugin, with default settings throughout.
>>
>> http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f234/bugbear33/photo_tech/hugin.jpg
>>
>> BugBear
>
> Not bad considering you did not have the raw files. Those jpegs were
> presented to demonstrate what I had done, and for others to see what
> they might be able to do (with the limitation of the jpegs.)
> ...but the your result still did not provide the shadow recovery to the
> point of view of my naked eye at the location.
>
> It was one of those, "you had to be there" sort of scenes. It was 11:00
> AM lighting.
> The scene presented to my eye at the time did not have shadows as deep
> as those in any of the 3 exposures. I knew the clouds would be blown if
> I exposed to reveal the shadow detail I was actually seeing.
> Matrix metering was not able to get to an acceptable solution, so center
> weight was used at center of the image.
> I thought this to be an appropriate time to try HDR and made that
> choice, just as I made the choice to put my HDR naivety out here so I
> could learn.
> Only knowing the principles of HDR and not having used it before, I was
> ignorant of some of what I should have done in planning the shot. Now I
> know.
>
> All in all though this has been an interesting exercise and I have
> learned a lot
>

I too have yet to commit to HDR as you can tell by the fact that I am
still using the trial version of Photomatix Pro 3.1.3. I too would like
to know how some of those HRD images are processed. However, I
typically like the normal looking HDR images. The ones that I don't
know are HDR'd.

What I've been doing is to use the tool I know best. I use Photomatix
for what it does best and Photoshop CS3 for what it does best.

In Photomatix, I primarly have been useing Light Smoothing's #4 or #5
setting (from the left). Strength is somewhere in the 60-90 range.
I'll play with the Smooth Settings a bit if needed. The remainder of
Photomatix's settings are best left to your image editor. Mine is Adobe
RAW and Photoshop CS3.

For example, I know very well how to tone down the blown highlights in
Adobe RAW and Photoshop. Same with color saturation and Tone settings
(curves), Color Settings (white balance), etc.

My version is as follows.
http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/zz354/veatchla/1121w_19w_20wcopy.jpg

It's not great, but probably close to what you saw when you were there.

Len

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 8:59 pm
From: Annika1980

On Jun 29, 4:51 am, D-Mac <ping...@news.group> wrote:
>
> There are 2 different programs. One is version 3:http://www.lucisart.com/lucisart-3-effects-features.htm
>
> and the other is the pro version 6:http://www.lucispro.com/lucis-artistic/lucis-pro-home-pages/sublime.htm
>
> Unfortunately for those looking for "free" software, this is not it. The
> basic version 3 is not exactly cheap and you have to pay serious money
> for the Pro version. I fought with myself for many weeks before making
> the decision to buy it. Having done that, I don't regret it but it's not
> for everyone.

It's simply a plug-in for people who can't figure out how to use
Photoshop.
Folks like yourself.

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 9:11 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-29 20:26:54 -0700, l v <veatchla@yahoo.com> said:

> Savageduck wrote:
>> On 2009-06-29 08:38:11 -0700, bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> said:
>>
>>> Savageduck wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well just so you can see what I was working with here are the 3
>>>> exposures resized only, no PP:
>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1119w.jpg
>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1120w.jpg
>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/1121w.jpg
>>>
>>> Hmm; Im not really seeing any major difficulties in that
>>> last exposure, but just to show willing I put the images
>>> through hugin, with default settings throughout.
>>>
>>> http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f234/bugbear33/photo_tech/hugin.jpg
>>>
>>> BugBear
>>
>> Not bad considering you did not have the raw files. Those jpegs were
>> presented to demonstrate what I had done, and for others to see what
>> they might be able to do (with the limitation of the jpegs.)
>> ...but the your result still did not provide the shadow recovery to the
>> point of view of my naked eye at the location.
>>
>> It was one of those, "you had to be there" sort of scenes. It was 11:00
>> AM lighting.
>> The scene presented to my eye at the time did not have shadows as deep
>> as those in any of the 3 exposures. I knew the clouds would be blown if
>> I exposed to reveal the shadow detail I was actually seeing.
>> Matrix metering was not able to get to an acceptable solution, so
>> center weight was used at center of the image.
>> I thought this to be an appropriate time to try HDR and made that
>> choice, just as I made the choice to put my HDR naivety out here so I
>> could learn.
>> Only knowing the principles of HDR and not having used it before, I was
>> ignorant of some of what I should have done in planning the shot. Now I
>> know.
>>
>> All in all though this has been an interesting exercise and I have
>> learned a lot
>>
>
> I too have yet to commit to HDR as you can tell by the fact that I am
> still using the trial version of Photomatix Pro 3.1.3. I too would
> like to know how some of those HRD images are processed. However, I
> typically like the normal looking HDR images. The ones that I don't
> know are HDR'd.
>
> What I've been doing is to use the tool I know best. I use Photomatix
> for what it does best and Photoshop CS3 for what it does best.
>
> In Photomatix, I primarly have been useing Light Smoothing's #4 or #5
> setting (from the left). Strength is somewhere in the 60-90 range.
> I'll play with the Smooth Settings a bit if needed. The remainder of
> Photomatix's settings are best left to your image editor. Mine is
> Adobe RAW and Photoshop CS3.
>
> For example, I know very well how to tone down the blown highlights in
> Adobe RAW and Photoshop. Same with color saturation and Tone settings
> (curves), Color Settings (white balance), etc.
>
> My version is as follows.
> http://i843.photobucket.com/albums/zz354/veatchla/1121w_19w_20wcopy.jpg
>
> It's not great, but probably close to what you saw when you were there.

Well as you can see things were problematic with the light, and it has
all been a good exercise. Better planning next time.
Here is what I came up with for my final tweek:
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HRD-1119-2021_tmD1w.jpg

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 10:52 pm
From: Vance

As others have commented, the image is a little too much regarding
contrast and saturation for a 'natural' look. For some images that
can be very okay, but it's not really that good for landscapes and
other images where people have a certain expectation of the colors and
tonalities based on their own experience. However, if you like the
effect and it's what you are going for, go for it.

Getting a natural look out of HDR is not easy, or simple. Neither PS,
nor Photomatrix, will give you much more than a base that you then
have to work up controlling contrast and saturation in something like
PS. Comments like 'Photomatrix gives me ...' and 'Photoshop
produces ...' point out part of the problem with many HDR images,
IMHO, which is letting the software do the work and accepting what it
does as what can be done.

I am a long way from being a HDR expert, but I have gotten to the
point where I can take what PS or Photomatrix can give me as a
starting point and come up with something that doesn't scream HDR.
These are a few of my more recent images using HDR as I learn more.

http://picasaweb.google.com/Vance.Lear/HDR?authkey=Gv1sRgCLC8tZO1lp3G3wE#slideshow/5352984309407040322

The dynamic range of the images all equal, or exceed, 11 stops and had
to be aggressively post processed using a lot of local adjustments
that you have to experiment with to discover what adjusments will
bring the image into line. For example, all of the images used areas
copied to another layer, which was equalized in some fashion, and then
blended back. Sometimes those layers had attached adjustment curves,
or were inverted after desaturation and then blended back using one of
the blend modes. The trouble is that I haven't found a real set of
'rules' about what to do. Things that have worked well on one image
that you would think would work well on another, don't always perform
that way.

HDR is a lot of fun, can be very useful and can certainly produce some
images with a 'WOW!' factor.

Vance

On Jun 27, 8:31 pm, Savageduck <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
> I have been dabbling with HDR both with CS4 (OK , but not great) &
> Photomatix Pro, which seems to give a fair degree of flexibility and
> reasonable results.
>
> Here is an image I have been working with from a recent Yosemite road
> trip. 3 exposures -1: 0: +1.http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Yosemite-19-20-21-HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg
>
> Any suggestions?
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Savageduck

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Running OS X on my PC!!!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/bb50fbf2b3ff2f37?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 6:01 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-29 17:44:50 -0700, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:

> On 29-06-09 20:10, Peter Chant wrote:
>> Savageduck wrote:
>>
>>> The only keyboards I have experienced the vanishing letter syndrome on
>
>>> were HP keyboards at work.
>>> I can't speak for any of the third party keyboards as I have never had
>
>>> a need to buy one, but I have heard good things about the Logitech,
>>> Kensington& DiNovo products
>
> My Logitech wireless keyboard no longer has letters on several keys
> after 18 months. My wireless mouse failed (left button always 'bounces'
> in two clicks). Logitech sent me a new mouse AND keyboard (as the
> original was no longer produced and the new mice did not work with the
> older transceiver). That new keyboard was faulty from the start (many
> CMD/ALT sequences were dead as were several captitals (hold shift and
> type a letter - nothing).
>
> So, they sent me yet another keyboard and mouse. All of the proceeding
> took a very frustrating 2 months. At first they didn't want the second
> keyboard back (I'd think they would want to learn why a new KB didn't
> work), then they said I'd receive a UPS return label. Still waiting.
>
> No more Logitech.

Well if that is the case scratch Logitech!

Now the DiNovo is also a Logitech product, I haven't seen one in the
flesh, but the reviews have been good.

I have about 6 older Mac keyboards all still functioning fine, without
letter wear.

BTW Alan, this weekend I am probably going to brave the crowds and go
up to Laguna Seca for the Moto GP races. If the heat holds off the 4th
of july long weekend might be tolerable, and if I can position myself
well there should be some good photo-ops.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 10:36 pm
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)

Larry Thong <larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote:
>John McWilliams wrote:
>
>>> Anyway, here's the simple way of running OS X on a PC. For Christ's
>>> sake Windows XP kicks ass so there's no reason to run OS X.
>>>
>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/macosx_on_a_pc/>
>>
>> yeah, that's an intelligent move for folks who are mostly
>> photographers!
>
>At least PC users are smart enough to do it.

Not if you are any example.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 10:38 pm
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)

Larry Thong <larry_thong@shitstring.com> wrote:
>Savageduck wrote:
>
>>> Anyway, here's the simple way of running OS X on a PC. For Christ's
>>> sake Windows XP kicks ass so there's no reason to run OS X.
>>>
>>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/20/macosx_on_a_pc/>
>>
>> Rita,
>> Over the years the headers of your posts have consistently
>> demonstrated your use of MT-NewsWatcher for Intel Mac.
>> I understand you have this propensity for making provocative
>> statements from time to time, mostly with tongue in cheek humor.
>
>And that's all it was, a provocative statement that wasn't meant to be taken
>as nothing more than "it can be done" type of post to demonstrate there

You're a lying asshole who is obviously trolling.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How To Detect Snapshooters from Photographers (was: Reason for so many
focus errors we see today?)
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/1415c1c3e6a92134?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 6:42 pm
From: PatM

On Jun 29, 3:07 pm, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:44:41 +0100, "whisky-dave"
>
>
>
> <whisky-d...@final.front.ear> wrote:
>
> >"Eric Stevens" <eric.stev...@sum.co.nz> wrote in message
> >news:i2ma451te3528rni8k9ts34mujtatb2frb@4ax.com...
> >> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:28:58 +0100, "whisky-dave"
> >> <whisky-d...@final.front.ear> wrote:
>
> >>>> Do you honestly think that any automatic focusing system in the world is
> >>>> ever going to be smart enough to figure out if you want the leading edge
> >>>> of
> >>>> that small-butterfly's wing, the antennae, or the further wing edges in
> >>>> precise focus?
>
> >>>Yes in a manor of speaking. The new Apple iPhone, when used as a camera
> >>>you touch the screen to select what you want the camera to focus on.
>
> >> Some Nikon [e.g. D300] cameras allow you to select the point of the
> >> image you wish to focus on.
>
> >How do they do that, or how it is achived. ?
>
> Seehttp://www.digitalreview.ca/content/Nikon-D300-Digital-SLR-Camera-Pg2...
>
> Under the heading of 'Auto-area AF' you will see an animation of a
> single focus point leaping around the view finder window. In fact it
> doesn't leap: you move it around with the multi-control button which
> acts as a set of cursor keys. You can work the button with your right
> thumb while peering through the view finder.
>
> Eric Stevens

Didn't Canon come out with a camera a few years back that tracked your
eye so that the focus point was whereever you were looking. I'm sort
of vague on it but it was something like that, it seems.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:12 pm
From: nospam

In article
<5c5f1644-2da8-4b6c-b99a-4f37e5a010f5@l12g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
PatM <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote:

> Didn't Canon come out with a camera a few years back that tracked your
> eye so that the focus point was whereever you were looking. I'm sort
> of vague on it but it was something like that, it seems.

they did indeed. it had to be calibrated for each user and didn't work
all that well nor has it been seen since.

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 10:43 pm
From: rfischer@sonic.net (Ray Fischer)

RichA <rander3127@gmail.com> wrote:
>Plastic? Thermal expansion of plastic is much greater than metal

As usual Rich is full of shit and spreading lies in order to justify
his desire that all cameras be as expensive and heavy as possible.

The coefficient of expansion of polycarbonate is actually slightly less
than that of aluminum.

--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Boycott Panasonic cameras - forced proprietary battery use in firmware
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/79623194af1b296b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:07 pm
From: nospam

In article <7thi45p64g123isum86u9cbd8fhqadc4s5@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> The user turns on the camera to take a picture, and might well take one
> or even multiple pictures before the GPS has acquired a warm fix. Any
> geotagging of those images will thus at best be a *guess* based on the
> last fix.

or they turn on the camera in the morning to get an initial fix, and
then the rest of the day are all hot fixes that take seconds not tens
of seconds. and don't say nonsense because i've done exactly that.

or they get the gps device that doesn't need a fix at all because it
post-processes the data.

> The only ways to overcome this issue would be to keep the GPS powered up
> all the time, draining the camera batteries even when the camera is
> turned off, or using A-GPS to get position data externally, which
> essentially means a cell phone built into the camera.

and as has been noted before, battery drain is a non-issue as there are
gps devices that can go nearly 2 days non-stop, far longer than anyone
would be shooting photos. plus, as has been mentioned in this thread,
the gps could go into a low power mode, maintaining enough data so that
it can get an instant fix when needed.

> A much more practical solution, IMHO, would be Bluetooth in the camera
> that could obtain location data from a Bluetooth cell phone, as well as
> transfer pictures to the cell phone.

or a bluetooth gps.

== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:38 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-29 19:07:17 -0700, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> said:

> In article <7thi45p64g123isum86u9cbd8fhqadc4s5@4ax.com>, John Navas
> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> The user turns on the camera to take a picture, and might well take one
>> or even multiple pictures before the GPS has acquired a warm fix. Any
>> geotagging of those images will thus at best be a *guess* based on the
>> last fix.
>
> or they turn on the camera in the morning to get an initial fix, and
> then the rest of the day are all hot fixes that take seconds not tens
> of seconds. and don't say nonsense because i've done exactly that.
>
> or they get the gps device that doesn't need a fix at all because it
> post-processes the data.
>
>> The only ways to overcome this issue would be to keep the GPS powered up
>> all the time, draining the camera batteries even when the camera is
>> turned off, or using A-GPS to get position data externally, which
>> essentially means a cell phone built into the camera.
>
> and as has been noted before, battery drain is a non-issue as there are
> gps devices that can go nearly 2 days non-stop, far longer than anyone
> would be shooting photos. plus, as has been mentioned in this thread,
> the gps could go into a low power mode, maintaining enough data so that
> it can get an instant fix when needed.
>
>> A much more practical solution, IMHO, would be Bluetooth in the camera
>> that could obtain location data from a Bluetooth cell phone, as well as
>> transfer pictures to the cell phone.
>
> or a bluetooth gps.

Something such as Red Hen Systems' "Blue2Can" + the Bluetooth GPS of
your choice.
http://www.redhensystems.com/inc/sdetail/168
http://www.pocketgpsworld.com/red-hen-blue2can-gps-a1037.php

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 10:44 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:51:19 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in
<G6ydnf-XW5rlztTXnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@giganews.com>:

>On 29-06-09 19:18, John Navas wrote:

>> Warm fix of 15-20 secs is possible under ideal conditions, but not
>> guaranteed (hence my 30 secs), and still nowhere near fast enough to be
>> practical in a digital camera.
>
>Says who? It take me a minute or two to setup for a simple shot, never
>mind one that I'm taking care about.

Cameras have to be designed for everyone, not just you. and many people
take pictures in less time than that.

>The design of the camera with a built in GPS could also allow for
>separate power state to the GPS with a slow sampling (say 5 seconds per
>minute) to keep the correlators aligned (and not bother wasting CPU on
>the nav solution and formatting data outputs) and then when the camera
>would be turned on, the GPS could enter a full performance mode with the
>correlators pretty much on code. ...

With all due respect, that's uninformed speculation not reflected in
real world products. Let me know if and when any such products
materialize.

>> A much more practical solution, IMHO, would be Bluetooth in the camera
>> that could obtain location data from a Bluetooth cell phone, as well as
>> transfer pictures to the cell phone.
>
>Well, except for the 85% of the SW US that I was in last year and 2006
>without cell phone coverage. Considering that that area has a larger
>population than Canada, it shows that the world is a hell of a lot
>bigger than the cell phone coverage area.

Irrelevant, since the cell phone would be no worse than your
hypothetical camera.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 10:47 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 22:07:17 -0400, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote
in <290620092207173983%nospam@nospam.invalid>:

Sorry, but hotfix doesn't work that way. Read my original message more
carefully and read up on GPS.

>or they get the gps device that doesn't need a fix at all because it
>post-processes the data.

Nope.

>> The only ways to overcome this issue would be to keep the GPS powered up
>> all the time, draining the camera batteries even when the camera is
>> turned off, or using A-GPS to get position data externally, which
>> essentially means a cell phone built into the camera.
>
>and as has been noted before, battery drain is a non-issue as there are
>gps devices that can go nearly 2 days non-stop, far longer than anyone
>would be shooting photos.

Nope. Since the camera may be turned off for weeks (or more) at a time,
battery drain when the camera is turned off has to be insignificant.

>plus, as has been mentioned in this thread,
>the gps could go into a low power mode, maintaining enough data so that
>it can get an instant fix when needed.

Nope. Battery drain is just too high.

Suit yourself, but I have no interest in carrying an unnecessary
additional device.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 10:50 pm
From: John Navas

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:13:13 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in
<4oSdnbK--c0X19TXnZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@giganews.com>:

>On 29-06-09 18:47, John Navas wrote:
>> On 27 Jun 2009 01:08:25 GMT, Chris Malcolm<cam@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote
>> in<7al9o9F1vsk75U1@mid.individual.net>:
>>
>>> In rec.photo.digital John Navas<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> I also hike, but of course you're just being "cute".
>>> No I'm not. I'm pointing out that you have claimed that most of your
>>> experience is in the easiest and least demanding GPS navigation
>>> environment.
>>
>> 1. I've done nothing of the sort.
>> 2. That's simply not true. While conditions on water can be near ideal,
>> no more so than conditions on land, and conditions on water can also be
>> very difficult, in severe weather for example.
>
>The L band was chosen specifically for weather reasons.
>
>Conditions on open water are about the easiest, regardless of weather.

Sorry, but no. We're not talking high-grade marine GPS units with
decent external antennas here, we're talking el cheapo GPS chips with
tiny pos internal antennas. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous.

--
Best regards,
John (Panasonic DMC-FZ28, and several others)

== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 11:09 pm
From: nospam

In article <si9j45hp2s407foa68k3haq1mk0fuaiq3e@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >> The user turns on the camera to take a picture, and might well take one
> >> or even multiple pictures before the GPS has acquired a warm fix. Any
> >> geotagging of those images will thus at best be a *guess* based on the
> >> last fix.
> >
> >or they turn on the camera in the morning to get an initial fix, and
> >then the rest of the day are all hot fixes that take seconds not tens
> >of seconds. and don't say nonsense because i've done exactly that.
>
> Sorry, but hotfix doesn't work that way. Read my original message more
> carefully and read up on GPS.

i have. thanks for asking though.

> >or they get the gps device that doesn't need a fix at all because it
> >post-processes the data.
>
> Nope.

nope what?

> >> The only ways to overcome this issue would be to keep the GPS powered up
> >> all the time, draining the camera batteries even when the camera is
> >> turned off, or using A-GPS to get position data externally, which
> >> essentially means a cell phone built into the camera.
> >
> >and as has been noted before, battery drain is a non-issue as there are
> >gps devices that can go nearly 2 days non-stop, far longer than anyone
> >would be shooting photos.
>
> Nope. Since the camera may be turned off for weeks (or more) at a time,
> battery drain when the camera is turned off has to be insignificant.

and if the camera is off for 'weeks at a time' then one would expect
the gps to also be turned off. or the device plugs into the camera and
turns itself off when the camera is off. plus, just the other day the
time span was only 48 hours, now it's weeks. what happened?

> >plus, as has been mentioned in this thread,
> >the gps could go into a low power mode, maintaining enough data so that
> >it can get an instant fix when needed.
>
> Nope. Battery drain is just too high.

it isn't too high.

> >> A much more practical solution, IMHO, would be Bluetooth in the camera
> >> that could obtain location data from a Bluetooth cell phone, as well as
> >> transfer pictures to the cell phone.
> >
> >or a bluetooth gps.
>
> Suit yourself, but I have no interest in carrying an unnecessary
> additional device.

the bluetooth gps devices are small and hardly noticeable and you've
already stated that geotagging doesn't interest you so you could leave
it in the car and be close enough without carrying anything.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Update
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/47a7464e2ecdc094?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:28 pm
From: Rich

"Charles" <charlesschuler@comcast.net> wrote in
news:h2bf94$vn7$1@news.motzarella.org:

> I am not a lawyer.
>
> Here is my impression. RichA posted an image on the Internet which
> someone thought was a good example for the lens he was trying to sell.
> What's the big deal? I suppose the eBay poster should have given
> RichA credit, but that didn't happen and I fail to see any malice or
> damage or evil intent. Nothing actionable, as the legal eagles like to
> say.
>
> As I said, I'm not a lawyer.
>
> But, it is awesome to finally see a RichA photograph and it's a good
> shot, by the way. I might consider unblocking his posts.
>
> Forget about bashing Canon, and Sony, and plastics and join the rest
> of us.
>
>
>

Ever see the Second City episode where the Man from planet Zontar (John
Candy) took over the minds of Second City TV station personel using
cabbages stuck to the back of their heads? "Join us Blanchard!!"

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:29 pm
From: Rich

"jaf" <johnf202@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:dZudnX88D7Jr2tTXnZ2dnUVZ_rSdnZ2d@giganews.com:

>
> "Charles" <charlesschuler@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:h2bf94$vn7$1@news.motzarella.org...
>>I am not a lawyer.
>>
>> Here is my impression. RichA posted an image on the Internet which
>> someone thought was a good example for the lens he was trying to
>> sell. What's the big deal? I suppose the eBay poster should have
>> given RichA credit, but that didn't happen and I fail to see any
>> malice or damage or evil intent. Nothing actionable, as the legal
>> eagles like to say.
>>
>> As I said, I'm not a lawyer.
>>
>> But, it is awesome to finally see a RichA photograph and it's a good
>> shot, by the way. I might consider unblocking his posts.
>>
>> Forget about bashing Canon, and Sony, and plastics and join the rest
>> of us.
>>
>>
>
> And suppose the lens for sale is USED!
> Can post a picture of a new lens?
> Or one owned by anybody else?
>
> No sale!
>
> John

Most times when that happens, someone is posting an image cribbed off a
manufacture website. Most people expect and image of the genuine article
so it is unlikely that would impress buyers looking at the ad.
It can also be a red flag to a scam. Like where someone posts a tiny image
from a manufacturer site and the price is very low...

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 9:25 pm
From: "Atheist Chaplain"

"D-Mac" <ping.me@news.group> wrote in message
news:7asq8qF1vepf2U1@mid.individual.net...
> Doug Jewell wrote:
>> D-Mac wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The difference between you and me is I make a living with my cameras,
>>> you only fantasise about doing that.
>>>
>>> How much have you made from shooting tame "tamelife" this year? ROTFL.
>>>
>>> I make more money in a day taking photos like you stole a copy of and
>>> called "The one legged groom" than you made so far this year from all
>>> your photos. Who the Jackass?
>> And yet you aren't registered for GST:
>> http://abn.business.gov.au/(32ivsh2m5s4pn4rranv1lb32)/abnDetails.aspx?abn=43604101393
>> How's business douggy?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> I probably never will be registered for GST either.
> Rule #1.

because your nothing more than a hobby photographer with delusions of
grandure Douggie. Its easy to generate $75,000 a year turnover if a business
is sucessful, hell when I worked PART TIME for myself I generated that and
more.

> Never have a dog if you are going to bark yourself son.
>
> You and your like minded trolls have been dogging my arse for years and
> never found out anything except that I exist...
>
> More than I can say for the idiots you worship. Like "Charles Stevens" who
> was later knows as Mark Thomas... Neither of which identities actually
> existed. It sounds good to use a plausible name for Usenet, doesn't it?
>
> I use my name as required by Australian Federal law with every publication
> I am responsible for.

then why this lie on this page
http://www.weddingsnportraits.com.au/wed-plan.htm "Everything on this site
( including this document ) is © Copyright 1968 - 2008 Douglas St James,
Brisbane Australia" when your registered name on your ABN is "MACDONALD,
DOUGLAS JAMES"

--
[This comment is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Church of
Scientology International]
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your
Christ." Gandhi

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Why Use That POS Photomatix When There's Better Software?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/756bc8a732d2cc09?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:30 pm
From: l v

PDM wrote:
>> Wow! I sure hope you are not in sales.
>> Len
>
> He's sales manager for IBM
>
> PDM
>
>

That's sad.

Len

==============================================================================
TOPIC: PING SAVAGEDUCK: HDR software and resource
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/da58ed058ffb9cdb?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 8:37 pm
From: Troy Piggins

Been trying to find this site and software to followup your
recent HDR threads. Not sure if it's been posted or recommended
already. This guy seems to really know his stuff, has written
his own HDR (free) software, explains the technical side in a way
even I (at least for the most part) understand.

http://www.guillermoluijk.com/index2_en.htm
http://www.guillermoluijk.com/software/index.htm
http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guillermoluijk.com%2Ftutorial%2Fhdr%2Findex.htm&langpair=es|en&hl=EN&ie=UTF-8

It's not as easy to use as Photomatix, but much more control and
reading the above tutorials and articles will help understanding
a lot more.

--
Troy Piggins

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 9:05 pm
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-29 20:37:49 -0700, Troy Piggins <usenet-0906@piggo.com> said:

> Been trying to find this site and software to followup your
> recent HDR threads. Not sure if it's been posted or recommended
> already. This guy seems to really know his stuff, has written
> his own HDR (free) software, explains the technical side in a way
> even I (at least for the most part) understand.
>
> http://www.guillermoluijk.com/index2_en.htm
> http://www.guillermoluijk.com/software/index.htm
> http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guillermoluijk.com%2Ftutorial%2Fhdr%2Findex.htm&langpair=es|en&hl=EN&ie=UTF-8

It's
>
> not as easy to use as Photomatix, but much more control and
> reading the above tutorials and articles will help understanding
> a lot more.

Troy,
Thanks for the links. I checked his site and tutorials out. He has much
to offer and does appear to know his stuff.
Right now I have more than I can chew on with Photomatix and finding
suitable subject material for further adventures in HDR.
There were basic mistakes I made with the original exposure and I have
at least learned that much. My preparation will be better next time.
This has been a weekend of invaluable lessons for me.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The drugs don't work: Opinion Piece
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/fb2f9838cd727351?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 9:45 pm
From: Charles

The number of people on antidepressants is soaring – we may be more
miserable, but let's swap the pills for support and care

* Comment is free

The drugs don't work

The number of people on antidepressants is soaring – we may be more
miserable, but let's swap the pills for support and care
, Monday 29 June 2009 12.00 BST

It may have been the happiest day of the year on 19 June, but we are
already into the hangover. Figures obtained by the Liberal Democrats
reveal that antidepressant prescription numbers are going through the
roof – 36m scripts were handed out to patients in England last year, a
rise of 2.1m on 2007. That's almost one for every adult. Lib Dem
health spokesman Norman Lamb is right to describe the figures as
"deeply disturbing".

Lamb has demanded improved help for people whose problems are
recession-related. It's true that financial woes create more distress,
but we shouldn't use the economy as a smokescreen for what is a
longer-term malaise. Antidepressant use has been going up for years –
prescriptions have more than tripled since the early 1990s. We have
not become a Prozac nation overnight.

So what is going on? Are we genuinely becoming more miserable? That's
part of the story – according to official statistics, the percentage
of people with a "common mental disorder (pdf)" increased from 15.5%
in 1993 to 17.6% in 2007 (that's a million extra unhappy people across
the UK). Some of these inevitably wind up at the GP surgery, seeking
relief.

But perhaps more instructive is what happens next. Most GPs respond to
mental health problems by reaching for the prescription pad, even
though guidelines from the National Institute For Clinical Excellence
generally recommend psychological therapies. To some extent, doctors
do this because they have little choice – more than three-quarters
have prescribed medication despite thinking an alternative would be
more appropriate. Most do so because there are no other options
available – decent psychotherapy services are still few and far
between, and often have long waiting lists.

<more>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/29/antidepressants-drugs

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 10:08 pm
From: Charles

Sorry,wrong group.

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.photo.digital"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.photo.digital+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en