Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Nov 28, 9:36*am, wrote:
On Nov 28, 9:48*am, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."



wrote:
wrote:
On Nov 28, 8:21 am, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:
wrote:
On Nov 28, 8:10 am, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:
Yesterday, my wife and I went to North Georgia to enjoy a quiet
Thanksgiving Day in the mountains.
We visited a beautiful waterfall, Minnehaha Falls, off of the beaten
path. *It was about a 5 miles drive on a one lane dirt/gravel road so it
really was quiet and secluded, especially on Thanksgiving.
Of course, I had to screw around with mother nature. *Absolutely NONE of
my photos come close to the way it looked in real life.
This is the way it looks in real life:
http://www.fs.fed.us/conf/ne-ga-wate...ha-falls.shtml
This slide show shows how an amateur can screw up perfection:
http://outdoors.webshots.com/slideshow/568959352vWicBu
I like Minnehaha. Have you ever been to Starr's Mill? I've got some
decent 35mm shots from about ten years ago from there that turned out
well.
I had never heard of it, but are you talking about this place :

http://www.pbase.com/kluken/starrs_mill-Hidequoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yep, that's the place. I took a picture from across the creek that
turned out very nice. I'll have to scan it sometime.

Or even better, go back and take some with your new camera.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, I'd like to go back. I've heard that the state or county has
taken it over, I hope they don't do something stupid!

They usually do, but it's good to think positive though.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:48:50 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:25:34 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Bull****, most DSLR's a LIGHTER than film cameras.

Actually, my E-3 weighs about 2 ounces lighter than my OM-2 and about
the same as my Nikon F-1. In fact, the Nikon F-1 with the mechanical
motor drive weighs the same as my E-300 with the extra battery pack
and the external case for it.

My Dad's Super Speed Graphic weighs a freakin' ton compared to modern
cameras. Seriously. :) I honestly don't know how he managed to
hold the freakin' thing to take pictures. My Dad's photographer when
he was with Hearst newspapers could hold it with one arm the camera
extended and hold the flash unit in the other up high.

Never figured out how he did it.

My digital SLR weighs more than the latest Nikon F6 35mm film camera and
my Nikon F100 film camera.

Did your dad use a Graflex Stroboflash or one of the Honeywell units?
I had both at one time. The Graflex had a humongous external battery
back you wore off your shoulder with a web strap.

He had a Stroboflash - I remember that one because of that battery
pack - I don't have that one anymore - don't remember what happened to
it. The one that came with it when it was passed down to me was a
Honeywell - I'd have to go look up the model number, but it has a long
round handle (a little bigger than a D-cell), tall - maybe16 inches?
and that classic Honeywell strobe face - looked like one of their
early "Auto Temp" thermostats. :)

My favorite camera of all time was a Rolleiflex T which I picked up at
the AF PX at Bein Hoa when we were passisng through. I carried that
damn thing in my pack along with a Zenith Model 1000 Transoceanic
radio. :)

Oh, I could tell you some stories about that radio. :)

Messing with Mother Nature
 

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:48:50 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:25:34 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Bull****, most DSLR's a LIGHTER than film cameras.
Actually, my E-3 weighs about 2 ounces lighter than my OM-2 and about
the same as my Nikon F-1. In fact, the Nikon F-1 with the mechanical
motor drive weighs the same as my E-300 with the extra battery pack
and the external case for it.

My Dad's Super Speed Graphic weighs a freakin' ton compared to modern
cameras. Seriously. :) I honestly don't know how he managed to
hold the freakin' thing to take pictures. My Dad's photographer when
he was with Hearst newspapers could hold it with one arm the camera
extended and hold the flash unit in the other up high.

Never figured out how he did it.
My digital SLR weighs more than the latest Nikon F6 35mm film camera and
my Nikon F100 film camera.

Did your dad use a Graflex Stroboflash or one of the Honeywell units?
I had both at one time. The Graflex had a humongous external battery
back you wore off your shoulder with a web strap.

He had a Stroboflash - I remember that one because of that battery
pack - I don't have that one anymore - don't remember what happened to
it. The one that came with it when it was passed down to me was a
Honeywell - I'd have to go look up the model number, but it has a long
round handle (a little bigger than a D-cell), tall - maybe16 inches?
and that classic Honeywell strobe face - looked like one of their
early "Auto Temp" thermostats. :)

My favorite camera of all time was a Rolleiflex T which I picked up at
the AF PX at Bein Hoa when we were passisng through. I carried that
damn thing in my pack along with a Zenith Model 1000 Transoceanic
radio. :)

Oh, I could tell you some stories about that radio. :)


Relive your youth:

http://photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=823131

Messing with Mother Nature
 

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 08:10:37 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."

As always, you do provide very detailed and well thought out critiques.

I've been guilty of this myself so I can safely say this technique is
way over used for routine imaging.

The whole point of using slower shutter speeds is to invoking water
"movement" and not replicate fire hose type streams of uninteresting
water flow. Done properly, you really don't need to use slower speeds
- just focal length and proper exposures.

http://www.myfourthirds.com/document.php?id=10461

Very nice photo, and very subtle use of HDR.


Shorter times produce images which convey more impression than actual
replication like this:

http://www.myfourthirds.com/document.php?id=22928

To properly use longer times, you have to at least have an idea of
where you will be taking the image and what you are trying to convey.

For example:

http://www.myfourthirds.com/document.php?id=35667

And then there are the impressionistic type of images that echo the
true style of light, color and movement in classically open style.

http://www.myfourthirds.com/document.php?id=39529

Also, I'd be interested if you shot these in RAW and what compression
ratio you used when you brought them out into .jpeg. Just looking a
little closer at them, it seems to me that something was lost in the
translation. Maybe a defraction issue? Did you use auto sharpen on
bringing them out to .jpeg? Something isn't right.

I did shoot these in RAW with no compression on the RAW. I use a batch
conversion macro in Lightroom (I think), and had it set up 640x480 size
with auto sharpen Landscape. I have never seen a jpg compression ratio,
I thought jpg just compressed it as much as possible. I also have never
used a batch conversion before, and never reduce the size so small, so I
really don't know if this is the result to expect or not.

Finally, I think you're trying too hard with this lanscape thing - let
the image speak to you before you try to shoot it. Think about where
you want it to go and what you want to do with it. What is it telling
you? It just seems that you took shots to take shots.

Sorry - you asked. :)

Nope I am not sorry I asked. As I have always said, I do try to learn
from all critique's and my feeling are never hurt. As with most of your
critiques, you do give your honest opinion and spend a lot of time
providing detail to reinforce your opinion. I appreciate it, I would
just recommend that for the next few week's, you look under your car
before you crank the engine. ;)

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:13 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:48:50 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:25:34 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Bull****, most DSLR's a LIGHTER than film cameras.
Actually, my E-3 weighs about 2 ounces lighter than my OM-2 and about
the same as my Nikon F-1. In fact, the Nikon F-1 with the mechanical
motor drive weighs the same as my E-300 with the extra battery pack
and the external case for it.

My Dad's Super Speed Graphic weighs a freakin' ton compared to modern
cameras. Seriously. :) I honestly don't know how he managed to
hold the freakin' thing to take pictures. My Dad's photographer when
he was with Hearst newspapers could hold it with one arm the camera
extended and hold the flash unit in the other up high.

Never figured out how he did it.
My digital SLR weighs more than the latest Nikon F6 35mm film camera and
my Nikon F100 film camera.

Did your dad use a Graflex Stroboflash or one of the Honeywell units?
I had both at one time. The Graflex had a humongous external battery
back you wore off your shoulder with a web strap.

He had a Stroboflash - I remember that one because of that battery
pack - I don't have that one anymore - don't remember what happened to
it. The one that came with it when it was passed down to me was a
Honeywell - I'd have to go look up the model number, but it has a long
round handle (a little bigger than a D-cell), tall - maybe16 inches?
and that classic Honeywell strobe face - looked like one of their
early "Auto Temp" thermostats. :)

My favorite camera of all time was a Rolleiflex T which I picked up at
the AF PX at Bein Hoa when we were passisng through. I carried that
damn thing in my pack along with a Zenith Model 1000 Transoceanic
radio. :)

Oh, I could tell you some stories about that radio. :)

Relive your youth:

http://photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=823131

Ah - well, I have enough junk around here - don't need more. :)

I just sentTim some of my older cameras - he's a Luddite and can
appreciate them. :)

Once I finish cleaning out my office, giving away and or selling some
of my antique stuff, I can think about maybe reliving my yute. :)

I swear - I found nine cameras in the back of the closet that I didn't
even recognize - had no idea they were there. I don't even remember
where I got them or what I was doing with them.

Fortunately, I got a great price for the lot which paid for my E-3 -
which should be arriving Monday.

WHOO HOO!!!

(Of course, now that I think about it, I'm starting a Olympus Digital
collection - I have an E-1 (which I bought used a couple of years
ago), E-300, E-330, an E-520 and the E-3 I just bought plus various
lenses from my OM-1/2 days and several of the Oly 4/3rds speciality
lenses. Maybe I need to sell my 300 series cameras. :)

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:32 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

Pardon the interruption...

I was reading in a travel trailer forum yesterday, and came across some
very nice comments about this park:

http://www.gastateparks.org/info/tallulah/

Initially I thought it was the one you mentioned. This morning I realized
it was different. Looks interesting.

Been there?
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*

Messing with Mother Nature
 

"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote in message
...

snip

I did shoot these in RAW with no compression on the RAW. I use a batch
conversion macro in Lightroom (I think), and had it set up 640x480 size
with auto sharpen Landscape. I have never seen a jpg compression ratio, I
thought jpg just compressed it as much as possible. I also have never
used a batch conversion before, and never reduce the size so small, so I
really don't know if this is the result to expect or not.

If you're not familiar with jpeg file compression you may want to check out
the link below. Every time you compress a jpeg file it will lose detail.
It's cumulative and you can't go back. It's always best to work on a copy
so the original retains its detail.

http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/for...mythsfacts.htm

Messing with Mother Nature
 

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:32 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

Pardon the interruption...

I was reading in a travel trailer forum yesterday, and came across some
very nice comments about this park:

http://www.gastateparks.org/info/tallulah/

Initially I thought it was the one you mentioned. This morning I realized
it was different. Looks interesting.

Been there?
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*

Yes, the photos I took were taken about 8-10 miles from Tallulah Gorge.
I have always found the Gorge an interesting place to look over for a
few minutes and then move on. It used to be a major tourist attraction
until GA Power built a series of dams to provide electricity to run
Atlanta Streetcars. The dams turned the river from roaring thunder to a
trickle. The dirt/gravel road I used to get to the waterfall I visited
was the old stagecoach road that took the rich tourist from Tallulah
Gorge to a secluded Country Inn.

Some State Parks I would recommend a

http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...D=98&s=0.0.1.5

http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...=100&s=0.0.1.5

http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...D=64&s=0.0.1.5

All in the general area of TG, but I prefer them over TG.


http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...D=88&s=0.0.1.5

Further south, and very close to Calloway Gardens. A great place for
golf and gardens etc.

http://www.callawaygardens.com/

Messing with Mother Nature
 

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:13 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:48:50 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:25:34 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Bull****, most DSLR's a LIGHTER than film cameras.
Actually, my E-3 weighs about 2 ounces lighter than my OM-2 and about
the same as my Nikon F-1. In fact, the Nikon F-1 with the mechanical
motor drive weighs the same as my E-300 with the extra battery pack
and the external case for it.

My Dad's Super Speed Graphic weighs a freakin' ton compared to modern
cameras. Seriously. :) I honestly don't know how he managed to
hold the freakin' thing to take pictures. My Dad's photographer when
he was with Hearst newspapers could hold it with one arm the camera
extended and hold the flash unit in the other up high.

Never figured out how he did it.
My digital SLR weighs more than the latest Nikon F6 35mm film camera and
my Nikon F100 film camera.

Did your dad use a Graflex Stroboflash or one of the Honeywell units?
I had both at one time. The Graflex had a humongous external battery
back you wore off your shoulder with a web strap.
He had a Stroboflash - I remember that one because of that battery
pack - I don't have that one anymore - don't remember what happened to
it. The one that came with it when it was passed down to me was a
Honeywell - I'd have to go look up the model number, but it has a long
round handle (a little bigger than a D-cell), tall - maybe16 inches?
and that classic Honeywell strobe face - looked like one of their
early "Auto Temp" thermostats. :)

My favorite camera of all time was a Rolleiflex T which I picked up at
the AF PX at Bein Hoa when we were passisng through. I carried that
damn thing in my pack along with a Zenith Model 1000 Transoceanic
radio. :)

Oh, I could tell you some stories about that radio. :)
Relive your youth:

http://photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=823131

Ah - well, I have enough junk around here - don't need more. :)

I just sentTim some of my older cameras - he's a Luddite and can
appreciate them. :)

Once I finish cleaning out my office, giving away and or selling some
of my antique stuff, I can think about maybe reliving my yute. :)

I swear - I found nine cameras in the back of the closet that I didn't
even recognize - had no idea they were there. I don't even remember
where I got them or what I was doing with them.

Fortunately, I got a great price for the lot which paid for my E-3 -
which should be arriving Monday.

WHOO HOO!!!

(Of course, now that I think about it, I'm starting a Olympus Digital
collection - I have an E-1 (which I bought used a couple of years
ago), E-300, E-330, an E-520 and the E-3 I just bought plus various
lenses from my OM-1/2 days and several of the Oly 4/3rds speciality
lenses. Maybe I need to sell my 300 series cameras. :)


Wow..I haven't seen an olympus SLR, digital or film, for years. I
remember the film SLRs were smaller than the nikons and canons, and very
popular because of that.

I'm down to one film SLR, one digital SLR, and one old Leica I love to
use but I am afraid of breaking. I sold off the D200. I just did not
want to contend with "DX" lens issues, as I explained to you previously.

But I love rangefinder cameras. They're quiet, they're compact, they're
fairly low tech. I have my eyes on a slightly used but cherry Zeiss Ikon
and a new Voigtlander Bessa. Both use M mount lenses. The new Zeiss
lenses, though, are very expensive. But there are plenty of used M
lenses around.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

D.Duck wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote in message
...

snip

I did shoot these in RAW with no compression on the RAW. I use a batch
conversion macro in Lightroom (I think), and had it set up 640x480 size
with auto sharpen Landscape. I have never seen a jpg compression ratio, I
thought jpg just compressed it as much as possible. I also have never
used a batch conversion before, and never reduce the size so small, so I
really don't know if this is the result to expect or not.

If you're not familiar with jpeg file compression you may want to check out
the link below. Every time you compress a jpeg file it will lose detail.
It's cumulative and you can't go back. It's always best to work on a copy
so the original retains its detail.

http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/for...mythsfacts.htm



Thanks for the link. That is why I shot in RAW, and don't use jpgs
except to upload to the web, which I normally set the quality to
"maximum", but since I was uploading a batch of files, I set the quality
to a small size. After reading your web site, I can see that is what
Tom meant by compression. I just thought it reduced the size of the
physical size of the image, it looks like it also changes the
compression ratio.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:32:20 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:13 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:48:50 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:25:34 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Bull****, most DSLR's a LIGHTER than film cameras.
Actually, my E-3 weighs about 2 ounces lighter than my OM-2 and about
the same as my Nikon F-1. In fact, the Nikon F-1 with the mechanical
motor drive weighs the same as my E-300 with the extra battery pack
and the external case for it.

My Dad's Super Speed Graphic weighs a freakin' ton compared to modern
cameras. Seriously. :) I honestly don't know how he managed to
hold the freakin' thing to take pictures. My Dad's photographer when
he was with Hearst newspapers could hold it with one arm the camera
extended and hold the flash unit in the other up high.

Never figured out how he did it.
My digital SLR weighs more than the latest Nikon F6 35mm film camera and
my Nikon F100 film camera.

Did your dad use a Graflex Stroboflash or one of the Honeywell units?
I had both at one time. The Graflex had a humongous external battery
back you wore off your shoulder with a web strap.

He had a Stroboflash - I remember that one because of that battery
pack - I don't have that one anymore - don't remember what happened to
it. The one that came with it when it was passed down to me was a
Honeywell - I'd have to go look up the model number, but it has a long
round handle (a little bigger than a D-cell), tall - maybe16 inches?
and that classic Honeywell strobe face - looked like one of their
early "Auto Temp" thermostats. :)

My favorite camera of all time was a Rolleiflex T which I picked up at
the AF PX at Bein Hoa when we were passisng through. I carried that
damn thing in my pack along with a Zenith Model 1000 Transoceanic
radio. :)

Oh, I could tell you some stories about that radio. :)

Relive your youth:

http://photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=823131

Ah - well, I have enough junk around here - don't need more. :)

I just sentTim some of my older cameras - he's a Luddite and can
appreciate them. :)

Once I finish cleaning out my office, giving away and or selling some
of my antique stuff, I can think about maybe reliving my yute. :)

I swear - I found nine cameras in the back of the closet that I didn't
even recognize - had no idea they were there. I don't even remember
where I got them or what I was doing with them.

Fortunately, I got a great price for the lot which paid for my E-3 -
which should be arriving Monday.

WHOO HOO!!!

(Of course, now that I think about it, I'm starting a Olympus Digital
collection - I have an E-1 (which I bought used a couple of years
ago), E-300, E-330, an E-520 and the E-3 I just bought plus various
lenses from my OM-1/2 days and several of the Oly 4/3rds speciality
lenses. Maybe I need to sell my 300 series cameras. :)

If you decide to trash your Hess trucks, let me know. My grandkids love
them. And although they get beaten to death, the trucks just keep on
tickin'.
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:04:01 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:32 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

Pardon the interruption...

I was reading in a travel trailer forum yesterday, and came across some
very nice comments about this park:

http://www.gastateparks.org/info/tallulah/

Initially I thought it was the one you mentioned. This morning I realized
it was different. Looks interesting.

Been there?
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*

Yes, the photos I took were taken about 8-10 miles from Tallulah Gorge.
I have always found the Gorge an interesting place to look over for a
few minutes and then move on. It used to be a major tourist attraction
until GA Power built a series of dams to provide electricity to run
Atlanta Streetcars. The dams turned the river from roaring thunder to a
trickle. The dirt/gravel road I used to get to the waterfall I visited
was the old stagecoach road that took the rich tourist from Tallulah
Gorge to a secluded Country Inn.

Some State Parks I would recommend a

http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...D=98&s=0.0.1.5

http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...=100&s=0.0.1.5

http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...D=64&s=0.0.1.5

All in the general area of TG, but I prefer them over TG.


http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...D=88&s=0.0.1.5

Further south, and very close to Calloway Gardens. A great place for
golf and gardens etc.

http://www.callawaygardens.com/



Thanks. I appreciate it.
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*

Messing with Mother Nature
 

"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote in message
...

snip

I did shoot these in RAW with no compression on the RAW. I use a batch
conversion macro in Lightroom (I think), and had it set up 640x480 size
with auto sharpen Landscape. I have never seen a jpg compression ratio,
I thought jpg just compressed it as much as possible. I also have never
used a batch conversion before, and never reduce the size so small, so I
really don't know if this is the result to expect or not.

If you're not familiar with jpeg file compression you may want to check
out the link below. Every time you compress a jpeg file it will lose
detail. It's cumulative and you can't go back. It's always best to work
on a copy so the original retains its detail.

http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/for...mythsfacts.htm

Thanks for the link. That is why I shot in RAW, and don't use jpgs except
to upload to the web, which I normally set the quality to "maximum", but
since I was uploading a batch of files, I set the quality to a small size.
After reading your web site, I can see that is what Tom meant by
compression. I just thought it reduced the size of the physical size of
the image, it looks like it also changes the compression ratio.

Yep, more compression, more artifacts.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Nov 29, 8:04*am, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:
JohnH wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:32 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

Pardon the interruption...

I was reading in a travel trailer forum yesterday, and came across some
very nice comments about this park:

http://www.gastateparks.org/info/tallulah/

Initially I thought it was the one you mentioned. This morning I realized
it was different. Looks interesting.

Been there?
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*

Yes, the photos I took were taken about 8-10 miles from Tallulah Gorge.
* I have always found the Gorge an interesting place to look over for a
few minutes and then move on. *It used to be a major tourist attraction
until GA Power built a series of dams to provide electricity to run
Atlanta Streetcars. *The dams turned the river from roaring thunder to a
trickle. *The dirt/gravel road I used to get to the waterfall I visited
was the old stagecoach road that took the rich tourist from Tallulah
Gorge to a secluded Country Inn.

Some State Parks I would recommend a

http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...D=98&s=0.0.1.5

http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...=100&s=0.0.1.5

http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...D=64&s=0.0.1.5

All in the general area of TG, but I prefer them over TG.

http://www.gastateparks.org/net/go/p...D=88&s=0.0.1.5

Further south, and very close to Calloway Gardens. *A great place for
golf and gardens etc.

http://www.callawaygardens.com/- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'd like to add that if you go to the Callaway area, go to Warm
Springs where FDR went alot. That's where his Little White House is,
and it's a very nice tour. Warm Springs is a cool little town, too.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:32 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

I would just recommend that for the next few week's, you look
under your car before you crank the engine. ;)

Duly noted.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:32 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

I did shoot these in RAW with no compression on the RAW. I use a batch
conversion macro in Lightroom (I think), and had it set up 640x480 size
with auto sharpen Landscape. I have never seen a jpg compression ratio,
I thought jpg just compressed it as much as possible. I also have never
used a batch conversion before, and never reduce the size so small, so I
really don't know if this is the result to expect or not.

Mr. Duck provided the explanation.

This is something that has annoyed me for quite a while now. You
would think that the camera manufacturers would get together and come
up with a standard RAW format that everybody could use at a base
level. Like open source software kind of thing. Each manufacturer
could add something of "theirs" for their specific camera, but you
could cross platforms if they got their act together.

If AOL hadn't of been pricks with their .GIF format, we would have
never seen .jpeg and all of it's attendent problems with handling RAW
output.

Morons.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...

If AOL hadn't of been pricks with their .GIF format, we would have
never seen .jpeg and all of it's attendent problems with handling RAW
output.

Morons.


http://www.eisboch.com/gotmail00.wav

http://www.eisboch.com/gotmail06.wav

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 17:36:21 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:32 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

I did shoot these in RAW with no compression on the RAW. I use a batch
conversion macro in Lightroom (I think), and had it set up 640x480 size
with auto sharpen Landscape. I have never seen a jpg compression ratio,
I thought jpg just compressed it as much as possible. I also have never
used a batch conversion before, and never reduce the size so small, so I
really don't know if this is the result to expect or not.

Mr. Duck provided the explanation.

This is something that has annoyed me for quite a while now. You
would think that the camera manufacturers would get together and come
up with a standard RAW format that everybody could use at a base
level. Like open source software kind of thing. Each manufacturer
could add something of "theirs" for their specific camera, but you
could cross platforms if they got their act together.

If AOL hadn't of been pricks with their .GIF format, we would have
never seen .jpeg and all of it's attendent problems with handling RAW
output.

Morons.

No ****.
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Nov 29, 4:26*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:32 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."

wrote:
I would just recommend that for the next few week's, you look
under your car before you crank the engine. *;)

Duly noted.

I look under my car daily to see if stuff is leaking by the bucket
load or look for stuff about to fall off.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:05:45 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:13 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 21:48:50 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:25:34 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Bull****, most DSLR's a LIGHTER than film cameras.
Actually, my E-3 weighs about 2 ounces lighter than my OM-2 and about
the same as my Nikon F-1. In fact, the Nikon F-1 with the mechanical
motor drive weighs the same as my E-300 with the extra battery pack
and the external case for it.

My Dad's Super Speed Graphic weighs a freakin' ton compared to modern
cameras. Seriously. :) I honestly don't know how he managed to
hold the freakin' thing to take pictures. My Dad's photographer when
he was with Hearst newspapers could hold it with one arm the camera
extended and hold the flash unit in the other up high.

Never figured out how he did it.
My digital SLR weighs more than the latest Nikon F6 35mm film camera and
my Nikon F100 film camera.

Did your dad use a Graflex Stroboflash or one of the Honeywell units?
I had both at one time. The Graflex had a humongous external battery
back you wore off your shoulder with a web strap.
He had a Stroboflash - I remember that one because of that battery
pack - I don't have that one anymore - don't remember what happened to
it. The one that came with it when it was passed down to me was a
Honeywell - I'd have to go look up the model number, but it has a long
round handle (a little bigger than a D-cell), tall - maybe16 inches?
and that classic Honeywell strobe face - looked like one of their
early "Auto Temp" thermostats. :)

My favorite camera of all time was a Rolleiflex T which I picked up at
the AF PX at Bein Hoa when we were passisng through. I carried that
damn thing in my pack along with a Zenith Model 1000 Transoceanic
radio. :)

Oh, I could tell you some stories about that radio. :)
Relive your youth:

http://photo.net/gc/view-one?classified_ad_id=823131

Ah - well, I have enough junk around here - don't need more. :)

I just sentTim some of my older cameras - he's a Luddite and can
appreciate them. :)

Once I finish cleaning out my office, giving away and or selling some
of my antique stuff, I can think about maybe reliving my yute. :)

I swear - I found nine cameras in the back of the closet that I didn't
even recognize - had no idea they were there. I don't even remember
where I got them or what I was doing with them.

Fortunately, I got a great price for the lot which paid for my E-3 -
which should be arriving Monday.

WHOO HOO!!!

(Of course, now that I think about it, I'm starting a Olympus Digital
collection - I have an E-1 (which I bought used a couple of years
ago), E-300, E-330, an E-520 and the E-3 I just bought plus various
lenses from my OM-1/2 days and several of the Oly 4/3rds speciality
lenses. Maybe I need to sell my 300 series cameras. :)


Wow..I haven't seen an olympus SLR, digital or film, for years. I
remember the film SLRs were smaller than the nikons and canons, and very
popular because of that.

As I've told you (and others) my Dad's photographer when he was with
the Record American gave me his Nikon F-1 system when I returned from
my second tour as kind of a welcome home present. He had replaced it
with a Canon system as I remember. At the time, I had purchased an
Olympus FTL in Japan - it was a decent early SLR and I liked it. I
used both for a few years until Oly came out with the OM-1 and it was
off to the races with Oly cameras. Never used another camera except
for a Hasselblad I purchased around '84 when I was seriously thinking
of doing freelance work.

During that period, I purchased quite a few older cameras for
different reasons - hence the number of cameras I had in my closet.
Each for a reason long forgotten, but I had some classics there.
Amazing that I forgot all about them.

The interesting thing was that I wasn't an early adopter of the
digital camera. When the C-80L was introduced in '97, I borrowed one
and didn't like it - thought digital would never replace film. That
changed with the C-2000 and the rest is history.

To tell the truth, Oly is the best DSLR on the market - they've been
ahead of the tech curve with their cameras since the C-2000 - Nikon
and Canon have always had to play catch up to Oly tech. The only
problem with Oly is that they refuse to market their cameras in the
same fashion as Nikon and Canon preferring to stick with a few
dedicated users to spread the word. Which is fine with me - not
everybody has one. :)

I'm going to be using the Hasselblad in the next couple of weeks doing
some experiments with the digital back. I want to try really large
format digital files and see how they work.

I'm down to one film SLR, one digital SLR, and one old Leica I love to
use but I am afraid of breaking. I sold off the D200. I just did not
want to contend with "DX" lens issues, as I explained to you previously.

But I love rangefinder cameras. They're quiet, they're compact, they're
fairly low tech. I have my eyes on a slightly used but cherry Zeiss Ikon
and a new Voigtlander Bessa. Both use M mount lenses. The new Zeiss
lenses, though, are very expensive. But there are plenty of used M
lenses around.

I gave Tim a Yashica range finder I had - great camera - loved it
actually, but I never used it much - I doubt it's had four roles of
film put through it - practically brand new.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:16:09 -0500, JohnH wrote:

If you decide to trash your Hess trucks, let me know. My grandkids love
them.

That ain't gonna happen. :)

FedEx just delivered my 2008 Hess Trucks today.

These ones are WAY cool.

Someday, assuming I ever have grandkids, they are going to enjoy my
Hess Truck collection. And the longer I keep the unopened boxed set
in original condition, the more they are worth.

Tell you what - I'll sell you the opened display truck collection.
It's complete from the first one to today's arrival. Only opened for
display purposes, then put back into the box after I'm tired of that
display and I put up others.

I'll take $150,000 for them. That includes the specials including the
ones offered only to stock holders. :)

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 15:30:16 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Nov 29, 4:26*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:32 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."

wrote:
I would just recommend that for the next few week's, you look
under your car before you crank the engine. *;)

Duly noted.

I look under my car daily to see if stuff is leaking by the bucket
load or look for stuff about to fall off.

I heard a rumor from oe of your neighbors that you actually pedal your
car to work like Fred Flintstone because it doesn't have a floor - is
that true?

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 17:53:21 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...

If AOL hadn't of been pricks with their .GIF format, we would have
never seen .jpeg and all of it's attendent problems with handling RAW
output.

Morons.

http://www.eisboch.com/gotmail00.wav

http://www.eisboch.com/gotmail06.wav

NNNNOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Nov 29, 4:36*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
If AOL hadn't of been pricks with their .GIF format, we would have
never seen .jpeg and all of it's attendent problems with handling RAW
output.

Morons.

I'd say that's one reason they are dropping photo hosting.

They'll probably tank in a couple years.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Nov 29, 5:33*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports

I gave Tim a Yashica range *finder I had - great camera - loved it
actually, but I never used it much - I doubt it's had four roles of
film put through it - practically brand new.

I'll testify to that!

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Nov 29, 5:43*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 15:30:16 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Nov 29, 4:26*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 07:19:32 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."

wrote:
I would just recommend that for the next few week's, you look
under your car before you crank the engine. *;)

Duly noted.

I look under my car daily to see if stuff is leaking by the bucket
load or look for stuff about to fall off.

I heard a rumor from oe of your neighbors that you actually pedal your
car to work like Fred Flintstone because it doesn't have a floor - is
that true?

Well, yes and no. uh.. not now that is. it's amazing what you can do
with some tar and sheet tin.


Really!

Messing with Mother Nature
 

Tim wrote:
On Nov 29, 4:36 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
If AOL hadn't of been pricks with their .GIF format, we would have
never seen .jpeg and all of it's attendent problems with handling RAW
output.

Morons.

I'd say that's one reason they are dropping photo hosting.

They'll probably tank in a couple years.


It's been at least a year since an AOL signup CD has fallen out of any
magazines I've purchased. I took that as a good sign.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 18:38:28 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:16:09 -0500, JohnH wrote:

If you decide to trash your Hess trucks, let me know. My grandkids love
them.

That ain't gonna happen. :)

FedEx just delivered my 2008 Hess Trucks today.

These ones are WAY cool.

Someday, assuming I ever have grandkids, they are going to enjoy my
Hess Truck collection. And the longer I keep the unopened boxed set
in original condition, the more they are worth.

Tell you what - I'll sell you the opened display truck collection.
It's complete from the first one to today's arrival. Only opened for
display purposes, then put back into the box after I'm tired of that
display and I put up others.

I'll take $150,000 for them. That includes the specials including the
ones offered only to stock holders. :)

I bought three of the 2008 trucks a couple days ago. They are cool. Did you
get the little camper trucks that came out in June or July. The kids love
them too.

You're right about the grandkids. They love them, if you let them play with
them!

No, I'll pass on the set. Thanks for the offer though!
--
John H

*Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!*

Messing with Mother Nature
 

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:16:09 -0500, JohnH wrote:

If you decide to trash your Hess trucks, let me know. My grandkids love
them.

That ain't gonna happen. :)

FedEx just delivered my 2008 Hess Trucks today.

These ones are WAY cool.

Someday, assuming I ever have grandkids, they are going to enjoy my
Hess Truck collection. And the longer I keep the unopened boxed set
in original condition, the more they are worth.

Tell you what - I'll sell you the opened display truck collection.
It's complete from the first one to today's arrival. Only opened for
display purposes, then put back into the box after I'm tired of that
display and I put up others.

I'll take $150,000 for them. That includes the specials including the
ones offered only to stock holders. :)

Up here, we collected Dinky Toys made in England. I wish I had kept mine...
a lot of them were neet funny looking vehicles & tractors not seen over
here.

Messing with Mother Nature
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:16:09 -0500, JohnH wrote:

If you decide to trash your Hess trucks, let me know. My grandkids love
them.

That ain't gonna happen. :)

FedEx just delivered my 2008 Hess Trucks today.

These ones are WAY cool.

Someday, assuming I ever have grandkids, they are going to enjoy my
Hess Truck collection. And the longer I keep the unopened boxed set
in original condition, the more they are worth.

Tell you what - I'll sell you the opened display truck collection.
It's complete from the first one to today's arrival. Only opened for
display purposes, then put back into the box after I'm tired of that
display and I put up others.

I'll take $150,000 for them. That includes the specials including the
ones offered only to stock holders. :)

Up here, we collected Dinky Toys made in England. I wish I had kept
mine... a lot of them were neet funny looking vehicles & tractors not seen
over here.

forgot link.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinky_Toy

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 21:02:56 -0400, "Don White"
wrote:


"Don White" wrote in message
.. .

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:16:09 -0500, JohnH wrote:

If you decide to trash your Hess trucks, let me know. My grandkids love
them.

That ain't gonna happen. :)

FedEx just delivered my 2008 Hess Trucks today.

These ones are WAY cool.

Someday, assuming I ever have grandkids, they are going to enjoy my
Hess Truck collection. And the longer I keep the unopened boxed set
in original condition, the more they are worth.

Tell you what - I'll sell you the opened display truck collection.
It's complete from the first one to today's arrival. Only opened for
display purposes, then put back into the box after I'm tired of that
display and I put up others.

I'll take $150,000 for them. That includes the specials including the
ones offered only to stock holders. :)

Up here, we collected Dinky Toys made in England. I wish I had kept
mine... a lot of them were neet funny looking vehicles & tractors not seen
over here.

forgot link.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinky_Toy

Cool....

Messing with Mother Nature
 

Don White wrote:
"D K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote in message
...
Yesterday, my wife and I went to North Georgia to enjoy a quiet
Thanksgiving Day in the mountains.

We visited a beautiful waterfall, Minnehaha Falls, off of the beaten
path. It was about a 5 miles drive on a one lane dirt/gravel road so it
really was quiet and secluded, especially on Thanksgiving.

Of course, I had to screw around with mother nature. Absolutely NONE of
my photos come close to the way it looked in real life.

This is the way it looks in real life:

http://www.fs.fed.us/conf/ne-ga-wate...ha-falls.shtml

This slide show shows how an amateur can screw up perfection:

http://outdoors.webshots.com/slideshow/568959352vWicBu



Well...she sure gave you a dirty look!
What are you trying to say, dummy?

It's a joke...Smithers 'got it'.
Go away and leave the men alone when they're talking.



"the men"? Who is Smithers, dummy? One of your Simpson's characters?
Whose the adult here?

Messing with Mother Nature
 

"D K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"D K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote in message
...
Yesterday, my wife and I went to North Georgia to enjoy a quiet
Thanksgiving Day in the mountains.

We visited a beautiful waterfall, Minnehaha Falls, off of the beaten
path. It was about a 5 miles drive on a one lane dirt/gravel road so
it really was quiet and secluded, especially on Thanksgiving.

Of course, I had to screw around with mother nature. Absolutely NONE
of my photos come close to the way it looked in real life.

This is the way it looks in real life:

http://www.fs.fed.us/conf/ne-ga-wate...ha-falls.shtml

This slide show shows how an amateur can screw up perfection:

http://outdoors.webshots.com/slideshow/568959352vWicBu



Well...she sure gave you a dirty look!
What are you trying to say, dummy?

It's a joke...Smithers 'got it'.
Go away and leave the men alone when they're talking.

"the men"? Who is Smithers, dummy? One of your Simpson's characters?
Whose the adult here?

"Whose" you? ~~ Snerk ~~

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Nov 29, 10:20*pm, "Don White" wrote:
"D K" wrote in message

...





Don White wrote:
"D K" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote in message
news:afqdnabXWK9TcLLUnZ2dnUVZ_t_inZ2d@giganews .com...
Yesterday, my wife and I went to North Georgia to enjoy a quiet
Thanksgiving Day in the mountains.

We visited a beautiful waterfall, Minnehaha Falls, off of the beaten
path. It was about a 5 miles drive on a one lane dirt/gravel road so
it really was quiet and secluded, especially on Thanksgiving.

Of course, I had to screw around with mother nature. *Absolutely NONE
of my photos come close to the way it looked in real life.

This is the way it looks in real life:

http://www.fs.fed.us/conf/ne-ga-wate...ha-falls.shtml

This slide show shows how an amateur can screw up perfection:

http://outdoors.webshots.com/slideshow/568959352vWicBu

Well...she sure gave you a dirty look!
What are you trying to say, dummy?

It's a joke...Smithers 'got it'.
Go away and leave the men alone when they're talking.

"the men"? *Who is Smithers, dummy? *One of your Simpson's characters?
Whose the adult here?

"Whose" you? * * ~~ Snerk ~~- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Man, you and Harry are joined at the hip! Just like Harry, it's okay
for YOU to make a typo or writing mistake, but if anybody else does
they are "middle school dropouts" or some such huh? Keep it up, you'll
soon reach the asshole status of Harry. Did you happen to see your
lover's posts about being kind and nice during the holidays?

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Nov 29, 7:59*pm, "Don White" wrote:
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
messagenews:2ak3j49uvf73kgceko9voflbfp7lj0eg3u@4ax .com...





On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 08:16:09 -0500, JohnH wrote:

If you decide to trash your Hess trucks, let me know. My grandkids love
them.

That ain't gonna happen. *:)

FedEx just delivered my 2008 Hess Trucks today.

These ones are WAY cool.

Someday, assuming I ever have grandkids, they are going to enjoy my
Hess Truck collection. * And the longer I keep the unopened boxed set
in original condition, the more they are worth.

Tell you what - I'll sell you the opened display truck collection.
It's complete from the first one to today's arrival. Only opened for
display purposes, then put back into the box after I'm tired of that
display and I put up others.

I'll take $150,000 for them. That includes the specials including the
ones offered only to stock holders. * :)

Up here, we collected Dinky Toys made in England. *I wish I had kept mine...
a lot of them were neet funny looking vehicles & tractors not seen over
here.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"neet"? ~~ Snerk ~~

Messing with Mother Nature
 

On Nov 28, 7:33*am, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:
Boater wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Yesterday, my wife and I went to North Georgia to enjoy a quiet
Thanksgiving Day in the mountains.

We visited a beautiful waterfall, Minnehaha Falls, off of the beaten
path. *It was about a 5 miles drive on a one lane dirt/gravel road so
it really was quiet and secluded, especially on Thanksgiving.

Of course, I had to screw around with mother nature. *Absolutely NONE
of my photos come close to the way it looked in real life.

This is the way it looks in real life:

http://www.fs.fed.us/conf/ne-ga-wate...ha-falls.shtml

This slide show shows how an amateur can screw up perfection:

http://outdoors.webshots.com/slideshow/568959352vWicBu

PS - *If you move the mouse to the bottom of the screen an option bar
will pop up so you can speed up the slide show so each photo is only
up for 3 secs. *No one really wants to look at them any longer than 3
seconds.

You can also get entirely out of the slide show and look at the shots
individually, and at a larger size. When you do that, though, they look
fuzzy and out of focus, starting with photo #1. But I suspect that has
more to do with sizing/resizing for the photo site than for the actual
photos being out of focus. I liked #8322, because it gave me a sense of
the scale of the falls.

I think that was a photo of about 1/2 of the falls. *When I tried to get
all of the falls in the photo, i didn't like the way it looked. *No
detail, so I didn't even snap the photo. *The photos were taken using a
tripod, and using the timer with a 2 sec delay, so my hand was not on
the camera when it was taken. *So if they were fuzzy and out of focus it
was the result of operator error.

FWIW

Raf Siebert hangs out on the alt.guitar.bass board and is quite an
acomplished photo-type guy, He's got some really beautiful waterfall/
nature shots on his site.

here's his link to Flikr.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rafiii