Photoshop How To Use

Monday, February 23, 2009

[fnftwo] TTC - Candlelight

Here is my version of TTC-Candlelight.

Jatta

rec.photo.digital - 25 new messages in 9 topics - digest

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

rec.photo.digital@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Beware of Rocky Cameras, UK + Paypal
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/422cde92582b6a98?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 5:03 am
From: Rob Morley

On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 07:59:01 +0000 (UTC)
gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote:

> Peter wrote:
>
> > If you paid by cheque then you cannot do this - you are quite right.
>
> However if you pay by check, and send the check via the mail, it
> becomes mail fraud, which is agressively persued in the US by the
> Post Office police.
>
Is this not also the case with wire fraud?

== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 5:19 am
From: gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson)

Rob Morley wrote:
> Is this not also the case with wire fraud?

I don't know who investigates wire fraud, but it is NOT the Postal Police.

AFAIK PayPal was setup to avoid being regulated and covered by any laws.
They found a loophole and took it.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM

== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 5:19 am
From: "Trev"

In news:70figrF3vqr1U1@mid.individual.net,
<oss108no_spam@bangor.ac.uk> Willy Eckerslyke bashed on keyboard and
typed:
> Peter wrote:
>
>> Interestingly I have just done a new Ebay listing and as far as I
>> could see, Paypal is not a mandatory payment option.
>
> So did you actually try listing without offering Paypal? Or are you
> just refering to the option to untick a box?
>
>> I thought it was.
>
> I listed a car trailer the other day without offering Paypal (some car
> categories are exempt from mandatory Paypal), but when I then listed a
> camera without remembering to change my accepted payment methods, eBay
> wouldn't allow me to complete the listing until I'd provided a Paypal
> account number. The message that came up said that it _is_ mandatory.

Perhaps they think you cant send a trailer though the post unseen

--
Trev
Nobody is perfect.
But Being a Yorkshire man is as close as you can get.

== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:06 am
From: Rob Morley

On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 13:19:01 +0000 (UTC)
gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote:

> Rob Morley wrote:
> > Is this not also the case with wire fraud?
>
> I don't know who investigates wire fraud, but it is NOT the Postal
> Police.

I meant that it's a federal offence, and thus taken quite seriously.
>
> AFAIK PayPal was setup to avoid being regulated and covered by any
> laws. They found a loophole and took it.
>
Why does that not surprise me?

== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 8:51 am
From: Peter

Willy Eckerslyke <oss108no_spam@bangor.ac.uk> wrote:

>Peter wrote:
>
>> Interestingly I have just done a new Ebay listing and as far as I
>> could see, Paypal is not a mandatory payment option.
>
>So did you actually try listing without offering Paypal? Or are you just
>refering to the option to untick a box?

The latter.

>> I thought it was.
>
>I listed a car trailer the other day without offering Paypal (some car
>categories are exempt from mandatory Paypal), but when I then listed a
>camera without remembering to change my accepted payment methods, eBay
>wouldn't allow me to complete the listing until I'd provided a Paypal
>account number. The message that came up said that it _is_ mandatory.

I stand corrected. Next time I will pay closer attention.

I think Paypal is a very convenient means of payment, but it is too
risky to allow buyers located in certain places when one is selling
pricey items.

I've just cancelled a bid from a Hong Kong bidder who obviously did
not read my description which clearly states 'no bidders from outside
Europe'. Fortunately Ebay allows one to cancel bids.

x----------x

== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 9:05 am
From: Rob Morley

On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:51:30 +0000
Peter <peter0o0o0o@peter2-0-o-0.c0.uk> wrote:

> Fortunately Ebay allows one to cancel bids.
>
But you have to spot it before the listing closes ...

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Invisible Pics on CompactFlash Card
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/4facf1cb2ce2e74d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 5:07 am
From: "Roy G"

"Searcher7" <Searcher7@mail.con2.com> wrote in message
news:db487eac-9fe9-47df-ad4b-a79f4ed89488@t3g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
>I have a Canon Powershot G2 with a Sandisk Ultra 2 2GBCompactFlash
> card.
>
> I took about a dozen pics and took the card out and inserted it into
> my reader so I could transfer the pics to my desktop.
>
> Unfortunately, for some reason even though I could scroll through all
> the pics while the card was still in the camera only certain pics now
> show up in the folder when in the card reader.
>
> Basically, I cannot transfer what I cannot see.
>
> Does anyone have any idea what the problem is,.as well as a solution?
>
> Thanks a lot.
>
> Darren Harris
> Staten Island, New York.

It might be a faulty card, so try a different one in the camera.

Sandisk cards usually come with a "recovery" program on a mini-cd, so if you
still have it, give that a try.

Roy G

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 5:54 am
From: tony cooper

On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 21:38:33 -0800 (PST), Searcher7
<Searcher7@mail.con2.com> wrote:

>On Feb 22, 11:12 pm, tony cooper <tony_cooper...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:45:12 -0800 (PST), Searcher7
>>
>>
>>
>> <Search...@mail.con2.com> wrote:
>> >I have a Canon Powershot G2 with a Sandisk Ultra 2 2GBCompactFlash
>> >card.
>>
>> >I took about a dozen pics and took the card out and inserted it into
>> >my reader so I could transfer the pics to my desktop.
>>
>> >Unfortunately, for some reason even though I could scroll through all
>> >the pics while the card was still in the camera only certain pics now
>> >show up in the folder when in the card reader.
>>
>> >Basically, I cannot transfer what I cannot see.
>>
>> >Does anyone have any idea what the problem is,.as well as a solution?
>>
>> >Thanks a lot.
>>
>> Any chance you have the camera set to .jpg+RAW? The .jpgs will show,
>> but the RAW files will not unless you are opening them with something
>> that reads RAW. When I stick a card with 100 RAW images on it in my
>> card reader, my Windows Scanner and Camera Wizard pops up to tell me
>> there are no files on the card. I close that and go to Bridge to open
>> them.
>>
>> --
>> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
>
>What do you mean, "go to Bridge to open them."?

Bridge is an Adobe program that opens RAW files. It's part of the
Photoshop CS program.

If you do have your camera set to .jpg+RAW, you will get two images
every time you press the shutter. One will be a RAW image, and one
will be a .jpg image.

>There were a few pics already on the card. Then out of about a dozen
>more I took, the first four did show. But not the others.
>
>I tried taking a half dozen more pics, and they show up on the camera,
>but not when the card is plugged into the reader.
>
>I didn't change any camera settings during all this.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

==============================================================================
TOPIC: OT - ignore the troll Re: CHDK & Canon SD1000
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/d8e9cc9534d067dc?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 5:54 am
From: -hh

John McWilliams <jp...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "Carl Ashley" wrote:
> > Thanks for posting all that proof that you are nothing but a delusional and
> > desperate internet fag-stalker, hell-bent on trying to get attention from
> > some gay guy that will never have anything to do with you. LOL!
>
> > Go get a man in real life, you need a good fisting. That'll cure you.
>
> Pot, Kettle....

Simple and to the point, although the little trollboy won't grok it.
Nor this:

Good grief, the parade of idiocy from this lame troll never ends.

1. Because it drives the lame troll up the wall as he's too amazingly
stupid to figure out why he's being mocked, at least parody is
slightly more entertaining to the rest of us who have to tolerate his
lame cries for attention.

2. Resident posters reveal themselves ...gosh, by posting! The lame
troll then knows who to beg for attention from. Of course, when his
Mommy lets them, lame troll tries to find 'friends' on the net,
despite the troll having no real social skills. The troll tries to
laugh it off when they receive advice, since they don't want to admit
that they're a loser with no life.

3. A troll always claims that he has his allies. Of course, claims of
friends, followers, 'mindless' or otherwise, is merely delusions of
grandeur. The troll is invariably alone, with no one to come to his
aid, except the occasional army of self-created sockpuppets...gosh,
how "clever!".

4. How many times has the lame troll tried to hide their name? Since
employers now screen perspective employees, take a guess. Afterall,
being able to eat is overrated. And the ego of trying to claim to be
clever enough to 'hide' is reserved for the terminally insecure that
someone might actually find out who one is, which threatens the
minimum wage job down at McBurger's.

5. Lame trolls claim: 'I don't need any reason to back-up my claims
when I'm cleverly nymshifting all the time.' Its that simple. Of
course, an unsubstantiated claim from someone with a negative
credibility is always safely ignored.

6. What good is a real name online, besides credibility? Some real
posters have actually been invited to dinner, and even if one brought
wine instead of beer, it can still be a real friendship. Mister lame
troll doesn't have 'idiots' in his personal life, nor does he have
'friends', either...losers are invariably alone.

7. The lame troll tries to claim that he gets some degree of
entertainment for himself, evidence of psychiatric problems. What's
really happening is that he's falling apart in real life and his
posting is merely an attempt at escapism. Despite all of his
egotistical bravado, the schmuck is a loser...and he knows it. By
creating a windmill to tilt, he has tried to give himself a reason to
exist...but note the word 'tried'.

8. The lame troll claims to "not so insecure that I need your
recognition nor the recognition of anyone"...yet he continues to
insecurely act up in an attempt to gain attention. Similarly, he
tries to pull himself up by pulling others ('stupid", etc) down. Both
are psychiatric signs of extreme insecurity and a lack of self
esteem.

9. Trolls like to think that they are 'crafty' and have perfected the
art of deception, but its actually self-deception, and being a useless
pretender. It's amazing the degree to which they will debase
themselves just to get any attention. While it is tempting to say
that they could end their misery by committing suicide, the reality is
that since the lame troll is also a coward, he isn't brave enough to
bring himself to that.

10. The lamest of the lame trolls are "one hit wonders". Naturally,
they'll invent excuses that try to claim otherwise, but Occam's Razor
applies: the lame troll simply lacks the intelligence to actually be
creative and multi-dimensional.

11. Louis Ferron (1942-2005): "When beauty fails, stupidity makes
its entrance".

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 9:17 am
From: Edward T

On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 17:36:08 -0800, John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net>
wrote:

>"Carl Ashley" wrote:
>
>> Thanks for posting all that proof that you are nothing but a delusional and
>> desperate internet fag-stalker, hell-bent on trying to get attention from
>> some gay guy that will never have anything to do with you. LOL!
>>
>> Go get a man in real life, you need a good fisting. That'll cure you.
>
>Pot, Kettle....

So the emotionally desperate Mark Thomas fag-stalker is the same as those
that he's been stalking for years? You are as insane as the other
virtual-photographer trolls in this newsgroup. You've just proved it.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Anyone have a Sandisk Extreme III card?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/53ddc24865f14241?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 5:57 am
From: "David J Taylor"

Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
[]
> That's quite true. System space isn't the significant
> difference between OS's, though it is true that Unix
> variations have always made an effort to minimize the
> amount of space used. (Things like reducing the amount
> of swap space necessary by making executables
> non-writable, which allows the executable binary to be
> paged in only as needed. Because of that the program
> area of a executable need never be written to swap.)

Also true in Windows, I believe, where non-writeable portions of the
executable are not written to swap.

> The historical difference between disk useage on Unix
> and Windows had to do with file system block allocation.
> Microsoft was never one to look ahead and design today's
> OS with the idea in mind that tomorrow's hardware would
> be different. Unix on the other had was designed right
> from the start by people researching how to write an OS
> to match tomorrow's needs. Hence when a large
> Winchester disk was 10Mb, MSDOS used a filesystem that
> divided up a 10Mb disk very nicely... and Unix used a
> filesystem that could divide up a 2G disk very nicely.
> When 500Mb disks became available those MS filesystems
> were horrible at allocating space efficiently (the first
> byte allocated caused a huge block to be locked up).

Although today's file system from Microsoft, NTFS, no longer has that
limitation.

> One of the things I recall getting a chuckle out of was
> a fellow from SGI explaining how, as they were trying to
> take over the computer imaging market 15 years or so
> ago, they realized that at some point they would have...
> *5 Gigabyte* filesystems! And of course that meant
> programs like /fsck/ (the File System CHeck utility)
> needed to be rewritten simply because as the originally
> worked it would take literally all day to reboot a
> crashed system if it had two or three 5 Gig filesystems
> that required checking. (Today a 50 Gig filesystem can
> be checked with fsck in a few minutes at worst.)

Yes, it was bad enough with a 500MB disk - UNIX took about 45 minutes to
reboot!

>> At least disk storage space is cheap now - I hate to think how much
>> I paid for my first hard disk in 1978 (?) - a top of the range 16MB
>> or 20MB unit IIRC!
>
> Lordy yes! And just imagine what we'll be using in
> another decade. Mind boggling...

.. and what /will/ we be storing there? The change I've seen in my own
use if that disk is now so cheap that I use disk for backup. There's no
longer the need to clean off old stuff to make way for the new, and you
can use simple, external, portable USB disks for backup. I recently got a
320GB one for a good price. All the photos I've ever taken don't more
than half fill that disk, to a first order. I still do backup onto DVD,
but I wonder for how much longer.

Cheers,
David

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Nikon Capture NX2.10 $180 US No Way!! Free!
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/bca540d539eacbc2?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:16 am
From: C J Campbell

On 2009-02-23 00:08:17 -0800, D-Mac <alienjones@y7mail.com> said:

> C J Campbell wrote:
>> On 2009-02-14 22:40:17 -0800, Robin Hood <RobinHood@Sherwood_Forest.com> said:
>
>>>
>>> This is just information. I do not have this on my computer and I did
>>> not steal it. Information is not illegal.
>>
>> You might want to ask Scooter Libby about that...
>>
>> In theory, Nikon could successfully sue you for lost business and
>> prosecute you for industrial espionage, copyright violation (the serial
>> numbers themselves are copyrighted), racketeering and aiding and
>> abetting a crime. But hey, whatever floats your boat.
>>
>
> You're a little off in your claims there mate.
> Serial numbers cannot be copyrighted if they did not exist when the
> software was copyrighted.

To the contrary, the serial number is copyrighted when created. It does
not have to be attached to any software. A copyright does not have to
be registered to be valid.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:17 am
From: C J Campbell

On 2009-02-23 00:31:27 -0800, Robin Hood <RobinHood@Sherwood_Forest.com> said:

> On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 19:51:25 -0800, C J Campbell
> <christophercampbellremovethis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2009-02-14 22:40:17 -0800, Robin Hood <RobinHood@Sherwood_Forest.com> said:
>>
>>> Hi Group
>>>
>>> Here is another freebie just for you!
>>>
>>> 1- Download the 60 day trial at Nikon USA:
>>>
>>> http://support.nikontech.com/cgi-bin/nikonusa.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=61
Scroll

down
>>>
>>> to the 60 day trial and download.
>>>
>>> 2-Use universal serial below and register in your name etc.
>>>
>>> 46634-46875-57018-15942-30739
>>>
>>> You MUST block Capture NX with your firewall and it will work fine. If
>>> you do not block, it will reject your serial number.
>>>
>>> WooHoo!
>>>
>>> This is just information. I do not have this on my computer and I did
>>> not steal it. Information is not illegal.
>>
>> You might want to ask Scooter Libby about that...
>>
>> In theory, Nikon could successfully sue you for lost business and
>> prosecute you for industrial espionage, copyright violation (the serial
>> numbers themselves are copyrighted), racketeering and aiding and
>> abetting a crime. But hey, whatever floats your boat.
>
> Wrong! Serial numbers are not copyrighted. Show me any proof of your
> allegation that they are copyrighted. As far as the rest of your BS ie
> racketeering and aiding and abetting a crime. You are talking through
> your hat. Man are you du-uumb! Another sidewalk lawyer I presume?
> To you sir I say Pffft!
>
> Robin Hood
>
> PS. Stay tuned for many more free programs!!

You are a lawyer, then? Odd, since you claim to live in a country that
does not have the rule of law.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:56 am
From: tony cooper

On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 06:16:49 -0800, C J Campbell
<christophercampbellremovethis@hotmail.com> wrote:

>On 2009-02-23 00:08:17 -0800, D-Mac <alienjones@y7mail.com> said:
>
>> C J Campbell wrote:
>>> On 2009-02-14 22:40:17 -0800, Robin Hood <RobinHood@Sherwood_Forest.com> said:
>>
>>>>
>>>> This is just information. I do not have this on my computer and I did
>>>> not steal it. Information is not illegal.
>>>
>>> You might want to ask Scooter Libby about that...
>>>
>>> In theory, Nikon could successfully sue you for lost business and
>>> prosecute you for industrial espionage, copyright violation (the serial
>>> numbers themselves are copyrighted), racketeering and aiding and
>>> abetting a crime. But hey, whatever floats your boat.
>>>
>>
>> You're a little off in your claims there mate.
>> Serial numbers cannot be copyrighted if they did not exist when the
>> software was copyrighted.
>
>To the contrary, the serial number is copyrighted when created. It does
>not have to be attached to any software. A copyright does not have to
>be registered to be valid.

I don't understand this. How can a number be copyrighted? I
understand copyrighting the program, but how can "234XGi2405" be
copyrighted unless that is used as a name or title? The show "24"
probably owns copyright "24", but only when it is used as a title of
an entertainment product.

You cannot copyright an idea. You can only copyright a discrete
application of an idea. Since serial numbers are individually unique
and associated solely with specific instances ("234XGi2405" is
specifically associated one copy of a program), I would not consider
the serial number to be a discrete application.

I don't normally challenge people to provide a cite to back-up a
claim, but I would like to see something that validates this one.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:13 am
From: Chris H

In message <gnu59q$1p3$1@aioe.org>, U*U <nobody@dizum.org> writes
>
>"Robin Hood" <RobinHood@Sherwood_Forest.com> wrote in message
>news:con4q4hvbpkp99ft4r120sdlrtafq4l857@4ax.com...
>> >
>> BTW: there is information on the net on everything from how to make
>> Ricin poison to bomb making and more. None of this information is
>> illegal and it's protected by the constitutional right of free speech
>> in your country. I don't live in the U.S.of A-holes and my country has
>> no real copyright laws.
>>
>> Robin
>>
>Not true, usenet is commercial speech,
No it is not

> and therefore not public

Yes it is.

> and as such
>is not protected under the Consistution.

Which constitution?

> Copyright infringement is not
>speech. You have violated copyright with your posting of the serial numbers.

>"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
>prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
>or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
>petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Which constitution and whose jurisdiction?

--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Did the Canon boat sink?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/b0dfb9b4ed431024?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:38 am
From: "bowser"

Just wondering where all the 5D IIs are, along with the extra batteries?
Still no stock I can find.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:18 am
From: "U*U"

"bowser" <wh@tisgoing.on> wrote in message
news:49a2b47f$0$5041$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
> Just wondering where all the 5D IIs are, along with the extra batteries?
> Still no stock I can find.
In Canada stores can only order them if they have a customer pre-order on
them. In Ontario, Canada the Sony A900 is exclusive to Henry's.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Vivitar is back
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/d2b614348aa7ac8c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:11 am
From: measekite

On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 21:25:13 -0800, RichA wrote:

> http://www.dcviews.com/press/vivitar-v8025.htm
>
> Also new to the Vivitar family are Sakar's:
> • Vivitar Series 1 Lenses for Digital SLRs (SRP $149.95 to $399.9),
> including an 85mm F1.4A spherical lens for portraits plus 500mm and
> 800mm f/8.0 mirror lenses – all usable with both film and digital SLR
> cameras.

Vivitar is really not back. Some new business just got the rights to the
Vivitar name but the company is long gone.

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:36 am
From: Dave Cohen

RichA wrote:
> http://www.dcviews.com/press/vivitar-v8025.htm
>
> Also new to the Vivitar family are Sakar's:
> • Vivitar Series 1 Lenses for Digital SLRs (SRP $149.95 to $399.9),
> including an 85mm F1.4A spherical lens for portraits plus 500mm and
> 800mm f/8.0 mirror lenses – all usable with both film and digital SLR
> cameras.

I had a Sakar

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:40 am
From: Dave Cohen

Dave Cohen wrote:
> RichA wrote:
>> http://www.dcviews.com/press/vivitar-v8025.htm
>>
>> Also new to the Vivitar family are Sakar's: • Vivitar Series 1
>> Lenses for Digital SLRs (SRP $149.95 to $399.9), including an 85mm
>> F1.4A spherical lens for portraits plus 500mm and 800mm f/8.0
>> mirror lenses – all usable with both film and digital SLR cameras.
>
> I had a Sakar (and I pressed wrong button). What I intended to add
> was it seemed to work well, couldn't see any difference between that and my
fixed canon lenses. Only problem was when camera hung on my neck, zoom
would creep. This was on a canon slr film camera quite a long time ago now.
Dave Cohen

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 8:48 am
From: Savageduck

On 2009-02-23 07:36:58 -0800, Dave Cohen <user@example.net> said:

> RichA wrote:
>> http://www.dcviews.com/press/vivitar-v8025.htm
>>
>> Also new to the Vivitar family are Sakar's:
>> ¥ Vivitar Series 1 Lenses for Digital SLRs (SRP $149.95 to $399.9),
>> including an 85mm F1.4A spherical lens for portraits plus 500mm and
>> 800mm f/8.0 mirror lenses Ð all usable with both film and digital SLR
>> cameras.
>
> I had a Sakar

I understand you can get medication for that. ;-)
--
Regards,
Savageduck

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Concrete of war
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/a0d5ae512bf867f2?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:41 am
From: Silverdolphin

Bunkers at present day, those defensive pillbox were built to encumber
Allied forces advancing in Italy during World War 2. Their careless
presence is an attestation which reminds us of the horrors of war in
the indifference of every way life.

Comments and suggestions will be appreciated.

http://www.giuliobrantl.com/concrete.htm

--
-----------------------------------------------------
My last photos: http://www.giuliobrantl.com/hiroshima.htm

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:48 am
From: John McWilliams

Silverdolphin wrote:
> Bunkers at present day, those defensive pillbox were built to encumber
> Allied forces advancing in Italy during World War 2. Their careless
> presence is an attestation which reminds us of the horrors of war in
> the indifference of every way life.
>
> Comments and suggestions will be appreciated

> http://www.giuliobrantl.com/concrete.htm

Nice; thanks. I'd like to see the images at least 50% larger.

--
John McWilliams

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 8:15 am
From: tony cooper

On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 07:41:56 -0800 (PST), Silverdolphin
<iannik@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bunkers at present day, those defensive pillbox were built to encumber
>Allied forces advancing in Italy during World War 2. Their careless
>presence is an attestation which reminds us of the horrors of war in
>the indifference of every way life.
>
>Comments and suggestions will be appreciated.
>
>G
>
>http://www.giuliobrantl.com/concrete.htm

Unless there's a way I missed to enlarge these on the screen, the page
is a disappointment. They could be interesting shots. I can't tell
from what I saw.

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

==============================================================================
TOPIC: DPR's full D3x review
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/t/b0c85f4ecb60c84b?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 9:24 am
From: "Dimitris M"

>> Why Nikon wouldn't introduce a dust-removal system in an otherwise
>> excellent camera is beyond me, especially considering that dust removal
>> systems are now available in many entry level models.
>
> I don't see that it helps at all with my D700.

If you had not the dust removal system, you will see it. In my D70 I had to
clean the sensor at least every 6 lens changes (by air, not wipe). In D300
and D700, after thousent changes, never needed to clean the sensor.

If you have problem in the D700, then it must be from moistured dust
particles or droplets that sticks to the filter and they can not removed by
shaking.

BTW, the shaking MUST be performed every time the camera switced on and off.
If you leave the dust for long in the filter, it will be not easy to remove.
--
Dimitris M

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

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

[PSP-Snags] PARTAGE 70 BOISSONS

http://multiup.org/?lien=57c691aed690aec5a9c6ed25d5b49b11_boisson.rar <--CLIC ICI

Bisous de Tina

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
PSP-Snags Google group: http://groups.google.com/group/PSP-Snags
Send to: psp-snags@googlegroups.com
Uunsubscribe: psp-snags-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

http://groups.google.com/group/Cartoon-PSP * http://groups.google.com/group/Disney-Tubes * http://groups.google.com/group/PSP-Snags-Adult * http://I-Love-Tutorials.com/chat * http://I-Love-PSP.com * http://PSP.I-Love-Disney.com * http://I-Love-Cartoons.com * http://I-Love-Disney.com * http://KTimothy.com * http://Disney-Stationary.com * http://Disney-Kingdom.com * http://Disney-Clipart.com

This is a private email and is covered by TITLE 18, PART I, CHAPTER 47, Sec. 1030 and Internet Privacy Law. Sharing done, within this group, is for personal use only - NOT FOR PROFIT
NO COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT IS INTENDED.
Group owner is not responsible for the sends/opinions of its members
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[PSP-Snags] PARTAGE 77 CADRES

http://tinafr38.free.fr/page%20tube%20du%20net%20CADRES.html <--CLIC ICI

Bisous de Tina

[PSP-Snags] PARTAGE 85 TEMPLATES

http://tinafr38.free.fr/page%20tube%20du%20net%20TEMPLATES.html <--CLIC ICI

Bisous de Tina

[fnftwo] Snagged from a newsletter but all so true

BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
N:AKONA;Sandy
FN:Sandy AKONA
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:konajill2@frontiernet.net
REV:20090223T165604Z
END:VCARD

Life's Little Goodies: Once Upon a Time

What are your best early childhood memories, the ones up to when you were age five or so? Come take a walk with me on a short journey down Memory Lane...

Do you remember building sand castles on the beach or in a sandbox with one of your little friends, talking about magical things we've long since forgotten about as adults?

Do you remember playing hide and seek? I remember it was so hard to keep quiet when someone was close to me but hadn't discovered my hiding spot yet. I always wanted to bust out laughing.

Do you remember how good popsicles were on a hot summer day? Few things tasted better to me. What was your favorite flavor?

Do you remember the first time a friend stayed overnight? Did you play make-believe?

Do you remember the wonderment of opening Christmas or birthday presents? What was your favorite early childhood toy?

Did you ever play in the rain until you were sopping wet? Or stomp in mud puddles or make mud pies?

One of my favorite things was climbing trees. I could be Tarzan, or the lookout on a pirate ship, or a mountain lion up in a tree.

Did you have a favorite bedtime story? One that, no matter how many times you'd heard it before, it was always as good as the first time.

Do you remember...

warm cookies fresh from mom's or grandma's oven?
catching fireflies?
your first pet?
opening a brand new box of crayons?
Saturday morning cartoons?
building tents with blankets and furniture?
coloring Easter eggs?
diving into a pile of autumn leaves?
clomping around in your parents shoes, playing grown up?
getting a ride on your dad's shoulders?

I hope I triggered some happy memories from your early childhood, or at least helped you to stir some up on your own.

Of course, I had a reason for our little walk down Memory Lane. Can you remember how innocent and carefree life was back then?

Do you remember what it was like to be free from worries and feeling like mom or dad could take care of anything that went wrong. Do you remember how absolutely safe you felt with them around?

That little girl or little boy that you were . . . is still inside of you. As innocent, curious, happy, and wide-eyed as ever.

Sure, the river of time may have washed away some of your conscious familiarity with who you were, and a flood of new memories may seem more relevant today, but still, that wonderful little child is in you, in your mind and heart, and still dreaming big crazy dreams and questioning a million different things.

It's so easy to forget our inner child when we have so many grown up concerns. It's so easy to pretend we've put our childhood behind us, but you know what . . . that inner child is part of who we are, right now, today, and for as long as we live.

Can our inner child bring value to our adult lives? In case you've forgotten these things about childhood:

Children are less judgmental of others.
Children are less fearful about being judged.
Children are eager to try new things, and unafraid of coming up short.
Children are naturally curious and not to proud to ask questions.
Children are teachable, creative, and enjoy learning.
Children are always ready to smile and laugh.

And perhaps most important of all, children are not afraid to be themselves.

Those seem like pretty good traits to keep as an adult, yet, how many of us have kind of let them slip away a little bit at a time?

Your inner child never leaves. He or she just slips quietly into the background of your life, waiting and hoping to come out and play once in a while. Waiting for us to rediscover our forgotten faces.

I invite you to take out an old family photo album and remember who you were when you were a child. Find that child within you. Enjoy the reverie. Celebrate yourself.

Every layer, every nuance, every glorious twist and turn that defines who you are is more wonderful, more beautiful, and more lovable than you know. If I could help you remember one thing about yourself, it would be this...

You are truly wonderful!

If you carry your childhood with you, you never become old.
- Tom Stoppard

He who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe is as good as dead; his eyes are closed.
- Albert Einstein

Children have neither past nor future; they enjoy the present, which very few of us do.
- Jean de la Bruyere

The great man is he who does not lose his child's-heart.
- Mencius, Book IV

There are no seven wonders of the world in the eyes of a child. There are seven million.
- Walt Streightiff

adobe.photoshop.macintosh - 25 new messages in 11 topics - digest

adobe.photoshop.macintosh
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh?hl=en

adobe.photoshop.macintosh@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How do I export an image as transparent in CS4?
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/fb16ce267757553d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Feb 22 2009 9:53 pm
From: JadeM@adobeforums.com

Ok thanks. Took a quick look at that and the tutorial falls just a tad short of one extra step. After #7 where the person is isolated and the bg is transparent. What format would you save that in if you were to be placing it into AI? Just leaving native PSD??

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 8:26 am
From: Buko

Just leaving native PSD??

Yes

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Photoshop cs4 and multiple monitors
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/368942698a63ed14?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 12:21 am
From: michael_j_mitchell@adobeforums.com

When i save a document as a jpg on one monitor and then drag the photoshop window to the other monitor and save it the same way, they turn out differently! Whats going on?

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 5:14 am
From: christoph_pfaffenbichler@adobeforums.com

Have You embedded an ICC-profile in the file?
In Your Color Setting what's Your setting for RGB?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: How to view more than one file at a time in CS4?
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/5e70a93a3a06fc7a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 12:24 am
From: "John Joslin"

It smells like Macromedia Dreamweaver.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:53 am
From: progress@adobeforums.com

Why do i imagine Buko, tongue out the corner of his mouth, trying to stay inside the lines now?

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 8:22 am
From: Buko

Hey! You been looking over my shoulder? B)

Yeah tabs are good for comics but I still like everything floating around the Mac Way.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Colormanagement Photoshop CS4 Macintosh
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/90b11b2ab7422810?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 3:27 am
From: Albrecht_Sieber@adobeforums.com

Thank you pfingen, that is just what I found. CS3 is the solution ;-)

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 4:52 am
From: DYP@adobeforums.com

If your printer driver is being forced to ColorSync (double profiling) when printing from PSCS4 do a search for "ColorSync Utility" for information on the workaround. However even with the workaround you will not be able to print a profile target from PSCS4.

To briefly summarize the workaround, you change the default profile in the CU to the profile you choose in the PS print dialog. This is done for the media that you select in the driver. Also some people have found that they need to also change that for the default setting in the CU (the one with the blue dot). You are still double profiling but with that same profile so the image will print correct.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:33 am
From: Albrecht_Sieber@adobeforums.com

Now I have installed the calibrated profiles to the printer driver. PSCS4 colormanagement is off. Not as easy as in CS3 but the result is ok. The results of double profiling is very coincidental.
If you place the ps-picture to illustrator the printing with 'colormanagement by the application' is no problem in CS4, illustrator has no problem using .ccc profiles.

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:49 am
From: pfigen

DYP

The problem is that I only use my own custom profiles, and since there seems to be no way to currently send truly raw RGB to the Epson driver right now, CS4 is out.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Save for Web Devices
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/af2dd3b9e2da4016?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 5:52 am
From: Jim_Jordan@adobeforums.com

BTW 3GB of RAM by todays standards is not a lot of RAM.

Insufficient RAM is not likely the issue in regard to SFW. While this is not as much RAM as one could have, 3 GB is at least 3 times more than is needed for the minimum system requirements for the OS and the application. As Robin is working with web graphics, we are probably not discussing huge files that would tax the system.

Repairing Permissions after the fact (i. e. not immediately before and
after an install) seldom helps.; Try it anyway, though.

What is 'after the fact' if it is not 'after an install'? Take the previous advice with a heavy dose of the common sense that it lacks. Ramon's comment contradicts Apple's instruction. Repairing permissions is done after an installation as a troubleshooting step. Apple never recommends this process prior to an installation as it is infinitely pointless to do so prior to an admin-only function like an installation.

Since credibility is likely to soon be an issue of this discussion, don't trust anything I have typed. Look up the details. If you are not familiar with permissions, learn about them from Apple, not from nonsensical discussion pasted incessantly in a Photoshop forum.

<http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2963>

== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:43 am
From: "Phos±four dots"

"BTW 3GB of RAM by todays standards is not a lot of RAM. "

I'm getting tired of reading this, because in so many cases people trot it out without thinking. 3 GB of RAM is PERFECTLY adequate for that hardware and OS, and will cover all but the most demanding of workflows.

== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:10 am
From: Buko

how much empty space is on the system drive?

the Spinning Ball usually means that the system is paging (writing SWAP) If the system drive is full you will have problems.

== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:13 am
From: Neil_Keller@adobeforums.com

Robin,

I'll chime in here as well -- for what you do, 3 GB RAM should be more than sufficient. If you work on huge or complex files, video, or several demanding applications simultaneously, we could revisit that. Your G5 1.6 GHz computer, as you know, is not the fastest, but it should work saving for Web.

If yours is not a disk free-space issue, it sounds like a maintenance issue. Disk Utility (repair permissions, and boot from Mac OS X disk to repair disk), Disk Warrior (again, boot from disk and run repairs) or Photoshop preferences may need to be reset. I run these maintenance procedures anytime I sense my computer is not working "quite right" (understand, this is quite infrequent), and these fixes plus the occasional running of Cocktail (or Onyx) do work.

Here's a bit more on permissions repair: <http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?path=DiskUtility/10.5/en/duh17.html>

Neil

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Using Photoshop PDF format
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/0cee0577f612615f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:03 am
From: Jim_Jordan@adobeforums.com

...and to add to Christoph's explanation of his answer...

My first post was only commenting on the post that immediately preceded it. I never addressed the original question by recommending any particular file format. I was just comparing GIF and PDF.

I personally would stick with PSD as the working format and save out another format to pass off for review by clients.

If you are looking for convenience of conversion for a client copy, check out the various automation functions of Photoshop. You might make it a simple one-click issue to make a duplicate file in another format.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Error when trying to use Automate>Merge to HDR... in Photoshop CS4
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/cef7b419c6f4e184?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:20 am
From: stephane_nahmani@adobeforums.com

Hello,

I am using Photoshop CS4 on a new MacBook Pro running 10.5.6.

If i select "Automate>Merge to HDR..." or "Automate>Photomerge...", i get an alert with an error:

« Error 48: File or folder does not exist.
Line: 38
-> $.evalFile(g_StackScriptFolderPath + "LatteUI.jsx"); »

I went the whole uninstall-reinstall the Design Premium suite, but i still get the same error.

Any ideas?
Thanks.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: CS4 and graphics cards
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/0122f50f397da632?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:23 am
From: Shaun_Ferguson@adobeforums.com

Not being all that technically-minded I'm not sure if my graphics card will manage all the functions required by Photoshop CS4. I've looked on ATI's site for the graphics card but can't find it - ATI Radeon 9650.
System Profiler tells me:
ATI Radeon 9650:

Chipset Model: ATY,RV351
Type: Display
Bus: AGP
Slot: SLOT-1
VRAM (Total): 256 MB
Vendor: ATI (0x1002)
Device ID: 0x4150
Revision ID: 0x0000
ROM Revision: 113-A58503-115

Can anyone tell me if this card (which came with the G5) will allow me to use all the new functions of Photoshop CS4?

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 6:41 am
From: Neil_Keller@adobeforums.com

Shaun,

Is your card on Adobe's list? See the tech notes in the grey panel on the Photoshop/Mac home page (one step up from here), particularly
<http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=kb405711&sliceId=1> and <http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=kb404898#supported>

Neil

==============================================================================
TOPIC: 2009 Macs and Peripherals :: General Discussion :: Chapter III
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/c2f0ebcc850b85d0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:03 am
From: LRK@adobeforums.com

Hi Larry,

I did get them fixed, thanks for asking. I posted the solution on a thread, but now I can't remember where. I thought it was this one but I don't see it.

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:23 am
From: JimGoshorn@adobeforums.com

think post # 103 is what you are looking for. I saved it :-)

Jim

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 7:35 am
From: LRK@adobeforums.com

think post # 103 is what you are looking for. I saved it

Oh good. Thanks very much Jim.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Brush size indicator
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/5cdb95d068ddbdde?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 8:30 am
From: Robert_Bradley@adobeforums.com

Hello,

I am a new P/S user and have a simple question. With the brush or the clone stamp tool how do you control whether the circle indicating its size appears on the image with the cursor or not. Sometimes its there and sometimes it isn't and I haven't found how to control it.

Bob

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Color management problems printing to Epson R2880 from CS3
http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh/t/f0ea998b627cf8a5?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 8:53 am
From: Helen_Glazer@adobeforums.com

I have read the various suggestions and thank everyone who offered them but I am still at an impasse here.

First off, I am using an Eizo ColorEdge CE210W monitor, calibrated with an EyeOne calibrator. As suggested above, I re-calibrated with a 6500K profile and downloaded the gballard.net PDI profile. I had calibrated it at 5000K at the suggestion of the printing industry tech support guy where I bought the monitor and calibrator, but I'm willing to try anything.

I checked my monitor at gballard.net where there's a gray scale test and the monitor is fine. I don't think the color management problem is with the monitor, I think it's in Photoshop.

I did another test suggested by gballard.net and compared the PDI displayed by Photoshop with a stripped-of-profile version displayed in Safari. Safari's version is more saturated. This is particularly noticeable in the browns and the skin tones of the African-American people.

I tried soft proofing in Photoshop using the Velvet Fine Art Paper profile, then printed it on Velvet Fine Art paper. There is a definite mismatch here, more striking than the difference between the Photoshop and Safari screen versions discussed above. Photoshop soft proofing shows a much grayer image than the print. The print is definitely more saturated throughout, and warmer in the sense of yellower. All the grays on the print have a yellow cast compared to the soft proof. If "simulate paper color" is turned out, it's even more useless, because it just washes out the screen version further.

I am at a total loss as to what to do next.

--Helen

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Feb 23 2009 8:55 am
From: Helen_Glazer@adobeforums.com

Just to correct a typo above, it should read "If simulate paper color is turned ON, it's even more useless, because it just washes out the screen version further."

--Helen

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

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "adobe.photoshop.macintosh"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/adobe.photoshop.macintosh?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to adobe.photoshop.macintosh+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

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

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

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