Worked all evening on this one...
 

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

Eisboch wrote:


Here's who will greet you somewhere in the house if you show up
"uninvited".

http://www.eisboch.com/cropfudge.jpg

Eisboch



Damn, those "Devil Eyes" would scare the hell out of anyone".


He's a funny dog. With Mrs.E., me and a handful of other people that he
knows, he is the sweetest, most loving dog you will find. Anyone else
though, he turns into one mean and vicious attack dog. He isn't the type
that makes a lot of noise barking and giving a warning. He just attacks,
suddenly and quickly while snarling and growling.

Eisboch

Worked all evening on this one...
 

John wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:03:08 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"Boater" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:16:58 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Much more interesting photo in original form.

Remember Mies..."Less is more." That holds true for photo
post-processing, too.

http://www.farnsworthhouse.org/photos.htm


However, photography is an art form and as such, modernism produced
Pablo Picasso who over his career veered from Symbolist imagery to
Surrealism - all and any of which were never boring, sterile or
monotone in concept or execution and still called "modernist".

Let's see your stuff - put it out there.

I don't know what all the fuss is about. Some pictures look very nice
natural. Some look very nice photoshopped. Personally, I have a lot of
fun with PaintShop Pro. Here's a modified picture taken of
a horse paddock that I modified in PSP to look like an oil painting.
Both the original photo and the "painting" look fine to me.

http://www.eisboch.com/paintshoppainting2.jpg

Eisboch

Great frame! :)


I agree with your point.
I am going to break my self-imposed rule here by posting these, but here's a
couple of "natural" pictures of our barn and house that I think came out
pretty good. They are not artistic statements, but I just like them.
They were taken late in the daytime, so the afternoon shadows and
directional lighting are coming into play.

Nikon D70s with "borrowed" Mrs.E. lens. All I have done was to resize them
in InfranView to a manageable size for posting on the website.

http://www.eisboch.com/largebarn.jpg

http://www.eisboch.com/barnandhouse.jpg

Eisboch



Lview has some great cropping tools, and a 'custom/fine rotation' tool that
allows you to 'level' a picture.

So does Paint Shop Pro.

Try the 'paint' tool and put some grass
over all that driveway!
--

John Salmonbait
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

Worked all evening on this one...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
It's the Ponderosa! I like your photos...how about some new shots of Sam
Adams?

He's a bit self conscious right now. Put on a few pounds since the end of
the summer.
Mrs.E. has him on a strict diet and he's a bit moody.

Eisboch



LOL...
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

Worked all evening on this one...
 

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Boater wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

Here are some Quotes from a famous photographer who totally disagrees
with Harry's concept of photographer and art.


Ahhh, Reggie...another of the OBsessed with Harry Assholes.


You don't take a photograph, you make it.


Interesting.. When I was in the south they talked about "making"
pictures, not taking them...
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

Worked all evening on this one...
 

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 08:37:09 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


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

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:16:58 -0500, Boater
wrote:


Much more interesting photo in original form.

Remember Mies..."Less is more." That holds true for photo
post-processing, too.

http://www.farnsworthhouse.org/photos.htm

However, photography is an art form and as such, modernism produced
Pablo Picasso who over his career veered from Symbolist imagery to
Surrealism - all and any of which were never boring, sterile or
monotone in concept or execution and still called "modernist".

Let's see your stuff - put it out there.

I don't know what all the fuss is about. Some pictures look very nice
natural. Some look very nice photoshopped. Personally, I have a lot of fun
with PaintShop Pro. Here's a modified picture taken of
a horse paddock that I modified in PSP to look like an oil painting. Both
the original photo and the "painting" look fine to me.

http://www.eisboch.com/paintshoppainting2.jpg

Kewl.

I just tried it myself.

http://www.swsports.org/Photography/_C050190wc.jpg

Water color conversion.

Worked all evening on this one...
 

stp wrote:
On Dec 17, 10:22 am, stp wrote:
On Dec 17, 7:58 am, Tom Francis - SWSports





wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:16:58 -0500, Boater
wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 06:47:26 -0500, Boater
wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Tue, 16 Dec 2008 19:45:51 -0800, "Mike" wrote:
Sorry, but it does nothing for me. It looks like prison bars on the beach.
I'm certainly no expert though, and I'm willing to learn. No offense I hope.
Neanderthal. :)
Here's the original converted from RAW (ORF) into .jpeg at high Q and
without editing.
http://www.swsports.org/Photography/_C050197org.jpg
Much more interesting photo in original form.
Remember Mies..."Less is more." That holds true for photo
post-processing, too.
http://www.farnsworthhouse.org/photos.htm
Tell you what Harry - you seem to be an expert on these things - I'll
give you password access to a directory on my web site just for you
and you can post your stuff there. All yours - you can post all your
best work for everybody to see and look at, comment on, etc.
Open offer - no strings.
Calm down, Tom. All I said was that I thought your original photo was
more, well, photogenic, than your Photoshopped versions. You seem to be
taking that as an insult, but it isn't. Think about it.
Did you bother to look at the photos of the Mies Farnsworth House? If
you did, you would have seen plain, simple, elegant design, unadorned,
and virtually impossible to improve upon. "Less is more." Do you think
that house needs to be Rococo-ized? Do you think Leonardo could have
improved on Mona Lisa by Photoshopping a different background?
It's not the point - contempory modernism is a Scandinavian artistic
construct which came about as a sort of '40s era industrial simplicity
where form didn't always meet function from an esthetic sense. It was
totally sterile and uninteresting which is why it died a quick death
in the early '50s which ushered in the era of post-modern art and
architecture - form met function while being esthetically pleasing.
However, photography is an art form and as such, modernism produced
Pablo Picasso who over his career veered from Symbolist imagery to
Surrealism - all and any of which were never boring, sterile or
monotone in concept or execution and still called "modernist".
I guess we have a totally different visual philosophy. I don't believe
nature needs a lot of improvement to be attractive. You do.
I'm dead serious about this Harry. I really want to see your creative
side - see how you interpret your world visually.
Let's see your stuff - put it out there.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
It's not that I like the original better but looking at the b&w
version I just felt a real disconnect from what I envisioned of the
actual scene. Maybe that's what you were shooting for. If so it
worked.

I shot a bunch of pictures during the recent ice storm here. Here are
a few unedited images that I like and might try to tweak. Anyone think
they are worth it or should they go in the recycle bin?

Steve P.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And here are the links:

http://www.monkeybutler.com/tmp/COPYDSC_2283.JPG
http://www.monkeybutler.com/tmp/COPYDSC_2286.JPG
http://www.monkeybutler.com/tmp/COPYDSC_2312.JPG
http://www.monkeybutler.com/tmp/COPYDSC_2317.JPG
http://www.monkeybutler.com/tmp/COPYDSC_6251.JPG


Ice and light are so cool... Can't hardly miss, I really liked the
fourth one of the field and wall..
-----------------
www.Newsgroup-Binaries.com - *Completion*Retention*Speed*
Access your favorite newsgroups from home or on the road
-----------------

Worked all evening on this one...
 

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 08:37:09 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

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

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 07:16:58 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Much more interesting photo in original form.

Remember Mies..."Less is more." That holds true for photo
post-processing, too.

http://www.farnsworthhouse.org/photos.htm
However, photography is an art form and as such, modernism produced
Pablo Picasso who over his career veered from Symbolist imagery to
Surrealism - all and any of which were never boring, sterile or
monotone in concept or execution and still called "modernist".

Let's see your stuff - put it out there.
I don't know what all the fuss is about. Some pictures look very nice
natural. Some look very nice photoshopped. Personally, I have a lot of fun
with PaintShop Pro. Here's a modified picture taken of
a horse paddock that I modified in PSP to look like an oil painting. Both
the original photo and the "painting" look fine to me.

http://www.eisboch.com/paintshoppainting2.jpg

It not a "fuss" per se.

More like put up or shut up.

It's all well and good to talk about not improving nature and
non-photoshopping, but the simple fact is that almost all photographs
are manipulated in some way and for a person who in theory takes a lot
of photographs for publications and such and relys on his ability to
take a "natural" photograph, I'd like to see the results of this
technique.

That's all - no fuss. If he wants to take me up on my offer, fine. If
not, well not my problem.
Eisboch



I'll be delighted to mail you a publication with a dozen or so of my
photos on the cover and inside. Some of the photos are very good, and a
couple are just ordinary.

None were "photoshopped."

This does not mean they were untouched. When I say photoshopping, I am
not referring to a bit of dusting and cleaning and color fixing where
there is a problem.

By photoshopping, I mean photos that are transformed from one life form
into another.

Again, there's nothing wrong with that, either. I just don't much like
photos that are obviously grossly different from what was seen and
photographed.

Worked all evening on this one...
 

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:53:54 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Eisboch" wrote in message
m...

"Boater" wrote in message
...

It's the Ponderosa! I like your photos...how about some new shots of Sam
Adams?

He's a bit self conscious right now. Put on a few pounds since the end of
the summer.
Mrs.E. has him on a strict diet and he's a bit moody.

Eisboch


Here's who will greet you somewhere in the house if you show up "uninvited".

http://www.eisboch.com/cropfudge.jpg

Eisboch


I've tried using the 'red eye reduction' feature in Irfanview to fix that
problem with the eyes for pictures of my dog. Wouldn't work. So I resorted
to the 'Clone' tool in the 'Show Paint Dialog' box. Then I could clone some
'black' and fill in the eye with some color. Works well.
--

John Salmonbait

Worked all evening on this one...
 

On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:57:20 -0500, Boater wrote:

John wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:36:45 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

John wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:16:50 -0500, Boater wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

Here are some Quotes from a famous photographer who totally disagrees
with Harry's concept of photographer and art.
Ahhh, Reggie...another of the OBsessed with Harry Assholes.
Who is Harry Asshole?
--

John Salmonbait
His name is not Harry Asshole, according to Boater's post, his name is
Harry Assholes. I really don't know who he is, we used to have a
regular who posted under the name Harry Krause, but I don't know who
Harry Assholes is.

This boater guy does seem very obsessed with most of the people in
rec.boats. He makes more negative posts about other people than
everyone else combined. I think he suffers from low self esteem and
shows classic symptoms of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. He also uses
the name hk and HK.

And...like a good joke (or a pile of dog poop), he gets lots of attention.
--

John Salmonbait


Is that the fifth or sixth snark attack today from the poster known as
HErring the Asshole?

....dog **** on a sidewalk.
--

John Salmonbait

Worked all evening on this one...
 

John wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:57:20 -0500, Boater wrote:

John wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:36:45 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

John wrote:
On Wed, 17 Dec 2008 09:16:50 -0500, Boater wrote:

Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

Here are some Quotes from a famous photographer who totally disagrees
with Harry's concept of photographer and art.
Ahhh, Reggie...another of the OBsessed with Harry Assholes.
Who is Harry Asshole?
--

John Salmonbait
His name is not Harry Asshole, according to Boater's post, his name is
Harry Assholes. I really don't know who he is, we used to have a
regular who posted under the name Harry Krause, but I don't know who
Harry Assholes is.

This boater guy does seem very obsessed with most of the people in
rec.boats. He makes more negative posts about other people than
everyone else combined. I think he suffers from low self esteem and
shows classic symptoms of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. He also uses
the name hk and HK.
And...like a good joke (or a pile of dog poop), he gets lots of attention.
--

John Salmonbait

Is that the fifth or sixth snark attack today from the poster known as
HErring the Asshole?

...dog **** on a sidewalk.
--

John Salmonbait


That's a perfect description for an asshole as obsessed as you are.

John "Dog**** on a Sidewalk" Herring.

Spot on.