Photoshop How To Use: rec.photo.digital - 26 new messages in 9 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
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/438bde75c5450595?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 4:15 am
From: ransley

On Jun 27, 10:31 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

Is Photomatrix the best of these HDR programs, is there a difference
betweeen them in final results ?

== 2 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 4:43 am
From: bugbear

tony cooper wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:43:57 -0500, Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt
> about it now. <nocontact@noaddress.com> wrote:
>
>> Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
>> have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one minute
>> of editing by using curves?
>
> I have never seen an HDR image that I find to be appealing. It seems
> to me that it involves taking a good photograph and making something
> harsh and unappealing of it.

It's quite possible you have, but didn't know it was HDR - I'm assuming
what you don't like is the super-saturated colours and
too-contrasty skies.

Neither of these is compulsory.

HDR techniques *can* be used to simply deal with HDR scenes, beyond
the DR of the camera's sensor (the archetypal sunlit window in a church problem)

HDR techniques can also be used to reduce colour quantisation, by (effectively)
moving the images DR w.r.t the sensors DR.

For example, if a "centred" exposure is from 10-90 (on a 0-100 bit sensor) one
could use a much longer exposure (blowing the high end) to stretch out the
range of sample points in the shadows, this allowing better shadow detail.

BugBear

== 3 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 5:50 am
From: tony cooper

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:43:41 +0100, bugbear
<bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:

>tony cooper wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:43:57 -0500, Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt
>> about it now. <nocontact@noaddress.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
>>> have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one minute
>>> of editing by using curves?
>>
>> I have never seen an HDR image that I find to be appealing. It seems
>> to me that it involves taking a good photograph and making something
>> harsh and unappealing of it.
>
>It's quite possible you have, but didn't know it was HDR - I'm assuming
>what you don't like is the super-saturated colours and
>too-contrasty skies.
>
>Neither of these is compulsory.

The HDR examples I've seen are, to me, reminiscent of Thomas Kincade's
"art". The gimmick factor outweighs everything else.

That's not a knock on this technique. It's a comment regarding my own
opinion of them. Photographs that do appeal to me are not necessarily
appealing to others.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

== 4 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 6:33 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-29 04:15:01 -0700, ransley <Mark_Ransley@Yahoo.com> said:

> On Jun 27, 10:31 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/Yosemit
> e-19-20-21-HDRtm-Dc1w.jpg
>>
>> Any suggestions?
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Savageduck
>
> Is Photomatrix the best of these HDR programs, is there a difference
> betweeen them in final results ?

As far as best goes, there are several which go about blending &
aligning multiple exposures only, and there are those which do that and
add tonemapping as an option. There are benefits to both techniques for
different results.
As far as final results with HDR go, there are too many factors
involved, and I suspect there will be different results attained with
different SW, or it might be awkward to get identical results with
different SW.

Each makes it own claims and has its supporters. Since I have tested
Photomatix, Dynamic-Photo HDR, and some of the other free offerings, I
found Photomatix has an interface and workflow I am comfortable with
and chose to sped my money with them.
CS4 does a pretty good job of blending multiple exposures, but leaves
much to be desired as far as tonemapping goes.

So for now I am going to put my learning effort into doing the best I
can with what I have, CS4 + Photomatix. If something else comes along I
will try it.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 5 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 6:56 am
From: Wayne R.

On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck
<savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote (with clarity & insight):

>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?

To me it looks like it was shot 50 years ago and put in a magazine -
it's got something about it but dang if I know what. Maybe it's the
orange bark and yellow trees...

== 6 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:15 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-29 05:50:51 -0700, tony cooper <tony_cooper213@earthlink.net> said:

> -----------<Le Snip>-----------------------

> The HDR examples I've seen are, to me, reminiscent of Thomas Kincade's
> "art". The gimmick factor outweighs everything else.

The horror! The horror!
>
> That's not a knock on this technique. It's a comment regarding my own
> opinion of them. Photographs that do appeal to me are not necessarily
> appealing to others.

Ken posted this link http://www.pbase.com/moorlands which gives me hope
that some subtle results are achievable with HDR processing.
What I am learning is, a fair degree of planning is needed to get
decent results with HDR. Trying to save an image or capture in
difficult light needs good preparation and I have seen examples which
led me to believe it is possible to get pleasing results.

The image I used for my initiation into HDR was not well planned as
there were several factors I was ignorant of when I made the decission
to try. I took the multiple exposures knowing this was going to be a
learning project for me, and not knowing where it was going to lead, or
the results I would get.

I just used -1;0;+1 for the 3 exposures as I knew the concept and the
ability of my D300. I did not know I should have minimally been using a
-2 to +2 range with a minimum of 3 exposures, or as many as 9.

Anyway I find the concept interesting, and I know pleasing results are
achievable (please let them be far removed from your Kincade analogy!!)
:-)

...and I need all sorts of things to keep me out of bars with this
retirement deal that I am just getting used to.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 7 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:24 am
From: dmoney

On Jun 28, 1:02 pm, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:43:57 -0500, Yeah - you're pathetic - no doubt
> about it now. <nocont...@noaddress.com> wrote:
>
> >Now tell us again why you're such a lame photographer that you couldn't
> >have done that with just one properly exposed frame in less than one minute
> >of editing by using curves?
>
> I have never seen an HDR image that I find to be appealing. It seems
> to me that it involves taking a good photograph and making something
> harsh and unappealing of it.
>
> That said, I completely understand Savageduck's interest. Part of the
> fun of photography is trying new techniques and pushing the envelope.
> The process can be an enjoyable learning experience even if the
> results are not something better than the original.
>
> --
> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

I agree,HDR is great if you want to make portraits that look aggesive
or angry or scenery that always looks as if a storm is coming or
leaving

== 8 of 8 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:24 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-29 06:56:03 -0700, Wayne R. <wruffner@KomKast.net> said:

> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:31:58 -0700, Savageduck
> <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote (with clarity & insight):
>
>> 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?
>
> To me it looks like it was shot 50 years ago and put in a magazine -
> it's got something about it but dang if I know what. Maybe it's the
> orange bark and yellow trees...

Well, I have been working on it, and have managed to get a better
balance. It was not taken in ideal lighting and was an experimental
first attempt at HDR.
With a little coaching, advice and tweeking this is where I got to;
http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/HRD-1119-2021_tmD1w.jpg

--
Regards,

Savageduck

==============================================================================
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 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 4:44 am
From: bugbear

Unbelievable wrote:
>
> Have none of you who blindly recommend Photomatix to everyone, or still
> stupidly use it, ever tried Mediachance's "Dynamic-Photo HDR"? It makes
> Photomatix look like MS Paint.
>
> http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
>
> Can you for once in your sad little lives stop acting like the mindless
> herd following sheep that you are?
>
> Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you people?
>
> There's even freeware that's better than Photomatix for cryin' out loud.

Yes, we were discussing it recently, thanks.

BugBear

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 6:09 am
From: "mattclara@gmail.com"

On Jun 29, 5:21 am, Eric Stevens <eric.stev...@sum.co.nz> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 09:18:07 +0100, "Ken" <n...@none.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >"Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
> >news:200906281617238930-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
> >> On 2009-06-28 16:02:29 -0700, "Matt Clara" <n...@myexpense.com> said:
>
> >>> "Unbelievable" <nocont...@noaddress.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:q1ue45t8dnvp6l8lkluivt4vptesujojdn@4ax.com...
>
> >>>> ever tried Mediachance's "Dynamic-Photo HDR"?
>
> >>>>http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
>
> >>> Why, yes I have, thanks for asking. I've been using it for a couple of
> >>> months now. I shot this series of images on Friday, June 26, and
> >>> composed them into an HDRI last night.
>
> >>>http://mattclara.com/misc/chris-clark-powerplant-HDRi-02b.jpg
>
> >>> The effect here in this image is relatively subtle. As far as I'm
> >>> concerned, that's the key to a good HDR image. If it's obviously HDR
> >>> (and not a spectacular image), you've failed. The main thing you'll
> >>> observe here are an overall vibrance from the HDR as opposed to any of
> >>> the original images. Also, note the sky is virtually free of noise due
> >>> to the averaging of the images--these were shot at ISO 100 at 8, 15, and
> >>> 30 seconds--lots of noise in those, particularly noticeable in the sky.
> >>> I still went for a high-contrast image, where the HDR temptation is to
> >>> illuminate everything. I think it works nicely. Oh, and I had to do some
> >>> shop work to get the dude to hold still.
>
> >> ...and I am impressed with your work here.
>
> >> The example I was using was more of an improvisation and not well planned
> >> (there was also a degree of HDR ignorance).
>
> >> I can see the potential for Dynamic-Photo HDR, however I am using a Mac
> >> and their OSX implimentation in X-Server, is very clumsy & awkward as this
> >> stage. Perhaps once it is more polished and OSX native I will reconsider.
>
> >> For now I will plan my HDR shots better and continue with Photomatix.
>
> >> --
> >> Regards,
>
> >> Savageduck
>
> >http://www.pbase.com/moorlands
>
> >Hi you may be interested to know why about a week ago I started looking at
> >HDR? It is because I came across this gallery and was very impressed. Take
> >alook and let me know what you think. The guyuses Photomatix.
>
> >good luck
>
> Impressive!
>
> Eric Stevens

I was particularly impressed by the cheesy frames and drop shadows he
uses, along with the bad photoshop filters.
He has a good eye, but is a hack in other ways.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 6:13 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-29 01:18:07 -0700, "Ken" <none@none.co.uk> said:

>
> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
> news:200906281617238930-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>> On 2009-06-28 16:02:29 -0700, "Matt Clara" <none@myexpense.com> said:
>>
>>> "Unbelievable" <nocontact@noaddress.com> wrote in message
>>> news:q1ue45t8dnvp6l8lkluivt4vptesujojdn@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>> ever tried Mediachance's "Dynamic-Photo HDR"?
>>>>
>>>> http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why, yes I have, thanks for asking. I've been using it for a couple of
>>> months now. I shot this series of images on Friday, June 26, and
>>> composed them into an HDRI last night.
>>>
>>> http://mattclara.com/misc/chris-clark-powerplant-HDRi-02b.jpg
>>>
>>> The effect here in this image is relatively subtle. As far as I'm
>>> concerned, that's the key to a good HDR image. If it's obviously HDR
>>> (and not a spectacular image), you've failed. The main thing you'll
>>> observe here are an overall vibrance from the HDR as opposed to any of
>>> the original images. Also, note the sky is virtually free of noise due
>>> to the averaging of the images--these were shot at ISO 100 at 8, 15,
>>> and 30 seconds--lots of noise in those, particularly noticeable in the
>>> sky. I still went for a high-contrast image, where the HDR temptation
>>> is to illuminate everything. I think it works nicely. Oh, and I had to
>>> do some shop work to get the dude to hold still.
>>
>> ...and I am impressed with your work here.
>>
>> The example I was using was more of an improvisation and not well
>> planned (there was also a degree of HDR ignorance).
>>
>> I can see the potential for Dynamic-Photo HDR, however I am using a Mac
>> and their OSX implimentation in X-Server, is very clumsy & awkward as
>> this stage. Perhaps once it is more polished and OSX native I will
>> reconsider.
>>
>> For now I will plan my HDR shots better and continue with Photomatix.
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Savageduck
>
> http://www.pbase.com/moorlands
>
> Hi you may be interested to know why about a week ago I started looking
> at HDR? It is because I came across this gallery and was very
> impressed. Take alook and let me know what you think. The guyuses
> Photomatix.
>
> good luck
>
> Ken

Now there is a photographer who has been working on his HDR techniques.
That is the sort of subtlety I would like to achieve, both for effect
and for shots taken in difficult light.

Knowing he used Photomatix tells me I have much more to learn, but with
time, scene/subject selection and planning getting good HDR results is
possible.

So, practice, practice, practice; patience, patience, patience, and persevere.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 6:38 am
From: "Ken"

"Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
news:2009062906133743658-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
> On 2009-06-29 01:18:07 -0700, "Ken" <none@none.co.uk> said:
>
>>
>> "Savageduck" <savageduck@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>> news:200906281617238930-savageduck@REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>> On 2009-06-28 16:02:29 -0700, "Matt Clara" <none@myexpense.com> said:
>>>
>>>> "Unbelievable" <nocontact@noaddress.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:q1ue45t8dnvp6l8lkluivt4vptesujojdn@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>> ever tried Mediachance's "Dynamic-Photo HDR"?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.mediachance.com/hdri/index.html
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why, yes I have, thanks for asking. I've been using it for a couple of
>>>> months now. I shot this series of images on Friday, June 26, and
>>>> composed them into an HDRI last night.
>>>>
>>>> http://mattclara.com/misc/chris-clark-powerplant-HDRi-02b.jpg
>>>>
>>>> The effect here in this image is relatively subtle. As far as I'm
>>>> concerned, that's the key to a good HDR image. If it's obviously HDR
>>>> (and not a spectacular image), you've failed. The main thing you'll
>>>> observe here are an overall vibrance from the HDR as opposed to any of
>>>> the original images. Also, note the sky is virtually free of noise due
>>>> to the averaging of the images--these were shot at ISO 100 at 8, 15,
>>>> and 30 seconds--lots of noise in those, particularly noticeable in the
>>>> sky. I still went for a high-contrast image, where the HDR temptation
>>>> is to illuminate everything. I think it works nicely. Oh, and I had to
>>>> do some shop work to get the dude to hold still.
>>>
>>> ...and I am impressed with your work here.
>>>
>>> The example I was using was more of an improvisation and not well
>>> planned (there was also a degree of HDR ignorance).
>>>
>>> I can see the potential for Dynamic-Photo HDR, however I am using a Mac
>>> and their OSX implimentation in X-Server, is very clumsy & awkward as
>>> this stage. Perhaps once it is more polished and OSX native I will
>>> reconsider.
>>>
>>> For now I will plan my HDR shots better and continue with Photomatix.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Savageduck
>>
>> http://www.pbase.com/moorlands
>>
>> Hi you may be interested to know why about a week ago I started looking
>> at HDR? It is because I came across this gallery and was very impressed.
>> Take alook and let me know what you think. The guyuses Photomatix.
>>
>> good luck
>>
>> Ken
>
> Now there is a photographer who has been working on his HDR techniques.
> That is the sort of subtlety I would like to achieve, both for effect and
> for shots taken in difficult light.
>
> Knowing he used Photomatix tells me I have much more to learn, but with
> time, scene/subject selection and planning getting good HDR results is
> possible.
>
> So, practice, practice, practice; patience, patience, patience, and
> persevere.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Savageduck

Yes he is the ONLY reason why I am tempted to give it a go. Ironically he
lives about 5 miles away from me. Perhaps I should email and ask for private
lessons? ;-)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Olympus EP-1 focusing may doom it for DSLR users
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/6b39aaf93aed311f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 4:51 am
From: bugbear

Sigh ... More Morons To Educate wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jun 2009 19:51:51 -0400, Charles <fort514@mac.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <fgfc45hrndge6k7l9edgruervvuq9ei2v5@4ax.com>, Steven Wandy
>> <swandy@si.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure about that. When I was using my last P&S (Canon G7) my major
>>> disappointment was the IQ - especially in low light or at higher ISOs
>>> - and the EP1 will certainly be an improvement there.
>> P&S may be getting better but their shutter lag is still deficient. The
>> main pro of DSLR's over P&S, and also the EP-1 over P&S from the looks
>> of the samples, is the IQ as you say. Point and Shoots can have great
>> results in daylight, often can't see the difference from a DSLR, but in
>> low light conditions Point and Shoots are poor.
>
> Too bad that you missed the moonlight shot and starlight-only shots that
> were posted from a P&S camera about a week ago.

Link?

BugBear

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Kodak kills Kodachrome film after 74 years
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/ffab234a019b33ac?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 5:29 am
From: tony cooper

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:49:16 -0500, John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>
wrote:

>John McWilliams wrote:
>>
>> Twibil wrote:
>
><edited for obscenity>
>
>> > Yeah? Rather than playing net-Nanny to pump up my ego, I've been
>> > writing and selling free-lance magazine articles since clear back in
>> > the 1970s. Editors have occasionally changed my words around to suit
>> > themselves -screwing things up just about as often as the've make them
>> > better- but the checks get cashed the same way in either case. (And
>> > just to stay *mildly* on-topic, I've also taken the photos and drawn
>> > the artwork to illustrate said articles.)
>> >
>> > So thanks anyway, but I already pretty much know how to make English -
>> > and photography- "pay off", and can do so quite nicely without your
>> > help.
>>
>> Oh, right. Post a few of the recent articles you've written, you
>> anonymous coward, and I'll never correct your grammar or spelling, much
>> less reason, again. Grammatical error in long paragraph, but you'll not
>> catch it.
>
>
>Hello, John:
>
>I caught Twibil's mistake (and capitalized it):
>
> "Editors have occasionally changed my words around to suit
> themselves -screwing things up just about as often as the've
> MAKE them better- but the checks get cashed the same way in
> either case."

You accepted "the've"?

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 6:46 am
From: John McWilliams

tony cooper wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:49:16 -0500, John Turco <jtur@concentric.net>
> wrote:

>> I caught Twibil's mistake (and capitalized it):
>>
>> "Editors have occasionally changed my words around to suit
>> themselves -screwing things up just about as often as the've
>> MAKE them better- but the checks get cashed the same way in
>> either case."
>
> You accepted "the've"?

Hah!

I am sure we'll not see any evidence of his 'paid' work, neither text
nor links.

What other names have you posted under, Twibil?

--
john mcwilliams

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

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 5:31 am
From: "whisky-dave"

"John Turco" <jtur@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:4A4855C4.E6358B24@concentric.net...
> whisky-dave wrote:
>>
>> "Chris H" <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote in message
>
> <heavily edited for brevity>
>
>> >>The user didnt; remember which fonts, but I was lucky in that the
>> >>offending fonts all had creation dates of April 1st 1976.
>> >
>> > Just look for last modification date.
>>
>> Well I was suspicious as we didn;t have any PCs in 1976.
>> In fact the first PC was about 1981 or so.
>> So that made me suspicious and that the fonts might be a virus or Trojan.
>
> <edited>
>
> Hello, Dave:

Hi,

>
> Uh, there's more that's "suspicious," than just the year 1976; have
> another look at the >date<, below:
>
> April 1st - APRIL FOOL'S DAY! :-D

True, but I do know things that have happened on 1st April.
It did raise suspision with me but this happened around 2002,
so it was the 1976 that first grabbed my attention.
Also remember it appeared as 4/1/76 due to American date format.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 5:38 am
From: "whisky-dave"

"ASAAR" <caught@22.com> wrote in message
news:4s8a45l6qh13jnqv6fi0o96he89c1djv6a@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:06:06 -0700, John Navas wrote:
>
>>>>Me too, but the last problem I had on a Mac was because someone had
>>>>installed some fonts 'from word' from their PC to the Mac version.
>>>
>>>Never had a problem with that.
>>
>> Indeed -- shouldn't be a problem.
>>
>>>>Cause all sorts of freezes, so I just deleted those fonts and everything
>>>> was fine. The user didnt; remember which fonts, but I was lucky in
>>>> that the offending fonts all had creation dates of April 1st 1976.
>>
>> That explains it.
>
> But there's also this :
>
>> April 1st, 1976: Apple Computer is founded by Steven Wozniak,
>> Steven Jobs and Ron Wayne. Ron Wayne designs the first Apple logo.
>
> And now you know the *rest* of the story. :)

I recon that was it, the reason for the dates that is, not why the fonts
didn't work as expected. Well done.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Is nothing sacred? :) Not in these groups or on E-bay!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/47a7464e2ecdc094?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 5:44 am
From: "Jeff R."

"D-Mac" <ping.me@news.group> wrote in message
news:7aret6F20c6b5U1@mid.individual.net...
> So here is official notice that you are in breach of Australian copyright
> laws. Take my images off your web site within 24 hours or suffer the
> consequences.
> http://www.weddingsnportraits.com.au/copyright-information.htm
>
> Maybe one day I'll see you lined up for the street van meals Jeff? Don't
> worry mate, I won't hold a grudge. In fact I'll give you an extra ladle of
> soup and maybe one of Margie's healthy buns mate.
>
> Just don't go selling any property in the next 90 days if you intend to
> keep the images you stole from my web sites. OK? If you do the person you
> sell it to is going to me might peeved when he has the sale voided and you
> have the find the money to pay for your theft.
>
> --
> D-Mac...

Oh finally!
Bravo!
A threat with a time limit.

Doug, sorry to say this, but you cannot limit my rights under the law simply
by posting a notice on your website.
My resposting, *with full attribution* (I must emphasise that) is totally
in accordance with the "parody and satire" provisions of the act.
I even stated as such (unnecessarily) well over a year ago when I first
pointed out your insulting and deceitful webpage.

But go ahead and make hollow threats, Doug.
That seems to be what you do best.

90 days and counting. What's that? Roughly the end of September.
What'll your excuse be then, Doug?

--
Jeff R.

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 5:49 am
From: "Jeff R."

"D-Mac" <ping.me@news.group> wrote in message
news:7arf1vF20c6b5U2@mid.individual.net...
>
> Students?
> How long have you been holding courses at the Jail?

"Jail"?
I thought you claimed to Australian.
The word is "gaol", Doug - unless you're a Yank.
For someone who feigns such contempt for all things American, its strange
how you choose to slavishly follow so many of their conventions.

>...Or are you in it? Maybe that's why you use a fake address?

LOL!
What's your address, Doug?

Or, more reasonably, what's the address of any one of the many galleries
which feature your fine work?

"23 Imaginary Street, Pretendsville"?

LOL

You are a sad and pathetic liar, Doug.

>
> --
> D-Mac... Back from the near-dead!
> With my survival comes a new ability ...multi-tasking.
> I can laugh, cough, sneeze, fart and pee all at the same time!

...and a disgusting one as well.

--
Jeff R.

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 5:46 am
From: Doug Jewell

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?
>
>

--
Don't blame me - I didn't vote for Kevin Rudd or Anna Bligh!

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:12 am
From: Annika1980

On Jun 29, 3:36 am, D-Mac <ping...@news.group> wrote:
>
> The difference between you and me is I make a living with my cameras,
> you only fantasise about doing that.
>
> 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?
>

Sure you do, Douggie. Sure you do.
Now go drink your Kool-Aid and take your meds.

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:17 am
From: Annika1980

On Jun 29, 3:29 am, D-Mac <ping...@news.group> wrote:
>
> > Nice osprey family Bret.
>
> Yeah... They're tame ones in a refuge. You can walk right up to the nest
> - if you're game to risk a pecking... I'm told.
>
> Ask him for a link to the shot of his car parked in front of them!

Not unlike baiting tame pelicans, right Douggie?

Here's what the editor of a local news outlet wrote me when he saw my
pics from yesterday:
==============
"Those are incredible! I have been a photographer a long time... I
know how difficult it is to be prepared, and to successfully "execute"
when such a rare moment in time happens. Videographers have it easy...
it takes a special kind of photographer to capture such scenes with a
still camera. You have it!"
==============

Compare that to some of the critiques you receive:

"Where's my disk of the pics?"
"Why are the photos all blurry?"
"Where's my leg?"
"Kite surfers?"

==============================================================================
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 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 5:44 am
From: "whisky-dave"

"Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote in message
news:i2ma451te3528rni8k9ts34mujtatb2frb@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:28:58 +0100, "whisky-dave"
> <whisky-dave@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. ?

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 6:52 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-06-29 05:44:41 -0700, "whisky-dave" <whisky-dave@final.front.ear> said:

>
> "Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:i2ma451te3528rni8k9ts34mujtatb2frb@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:28:58 +0100, "whisky-dave"
>> <whisky-dave@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. ?

For the iPhone I suspect there is a programmed option, how it is
implemented, I would just be guessing.

As far as the D300 and some other Nikon DSLRs go, up to 51 focus points
including 51 point 3D tracking, manually selectable using the multi
selector, single point AF, dynamic area AF, predictive focus tracking
(51 pnt 3D tracking), Auto-area AF.

...and then there is manual focus as a final option.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Recharging batteries in Japan
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/cf03b4b254af5fa7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 6:53 am
From: "James King"

We live in the US and plan to visit Japan next week.
I am going to take Nikon D90 and Canon SD 890 cameras.
Do I need an adaptor to charge batteries in Japan? Jorge

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Using Picture Controls to affect D90 video
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/0de832ea441d1658?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Jun 29 2009 7:11 am
From: eNo

Check out a video I put together demonstrating the Nikon D90's video
with custom Picture Controls.

http://www.esfotoclix.com/tech/picctrl

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

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