chupathingie

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 837 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: WTF? I mean really–WTF? #48229
    chupathingie
    Participant

    quite the artifact there… produced by the tonemapper? I’m with yugo, but yeah, WTF?

    in reply to: There will be pics #48050
    chupathingie
    Participant

    Finally getting around to looking at all the card dumps on my pc. Found one I like SOOC… seriously; default CR2-16bit tif conversion in raw therapee then resized and spit out as a jpg with image majick. I shot bracketed, but I really don’t know if the other 2 exposures are worth doing anything with! 😆

    in reply to: There will be pics #48051
    chupathingie
    Participant

    Welcome to Wyoming.

    in reply to: Photographers committed to a prank, seriously committed #48210
    chupathingie
    Participant

    Now, THAT guy could have done a very interesting “mugshot a day” for x years vid…

    in reply to: Lower 48 Aurora This Weekend! #48140
    chupathingie
    Participant

    I wound up in Nebraska for this, it was clear, didn’t see shit. 🙁

    in reply to: There will be pics #48058
    chupathingie
    Participant

    Wednesday night’s campsite… Meadow Lake is up at about 9100ft, and another alpine lake is upslope by a couple hundred feet to the right. The peak in the background is about 10600ft. We hiked up to about 10000ft before clouds and thunder rolled in. I’ll pass on the struck-by-lightning thing, TYVM…

    in reply to: There will be pics #48055
    chupathingie
    Participant

    well, thanky! Here’s the full view of that cloud gobbling up the ridge. The ridgeline is roughly a couple miles long.

    in reply to: There will be pics #48053
    chupathingie
    Participant

    Half an hour later, that big ridge in the back got swallowed. The range is called The Raggeds, BTW. The top of the range is ~13000ft.

    in reply to: There will be pics #48052
    chupathingie
    Participant

    first thing I saw when I walked out the front door this morning. I love coming to this place….

    in reply to: 4th of July Fireworks #48047
    chupathingie
    Participant

    That 2nd one, imtheonlylp is WAY tool cool. Reminds me of an undersea creature from the deep!

    Exactly what I thought… that one really stood out for me.

    in reply to: Olympian photo "outrage" #48033
    chupathingie
    Participant

    hell, it ain’t easy….

    in reply to: Sterograms #48034
    chupathingie
    Participant

    Yup, they work! I’m much more partial to cross-eyed viewing as it allows for using larger images (unless you’re Marty Feldman, with chameleon DNA, apparently).

    Side trivia: easy subs for 3D images can be had by simply mashing down the shutter button pointed out the car window as you speed down the highway. This is assuming you want pictures that look like they’re taken from a moving vehicle (gawd I hate those :lol:).

    in reply to: Olympian photo "outrage" #48024
    chupathingie
    Participant

    The weight lifter is the brawniest woman this side of Rosie the Rivetter.

    Sarah Robles beat out everyone on the American team at last year’s world championships…not just the women, but the men as well. She can lift almost 600lbs. Brawny, indeed.

    The cropping was abysmal.

    That’s an understatement. I had to separate subject from setting to avoid judging the images solely on technical merit (or lack of).

    As for the outrage, what the photographer has done seems to be a departure from the standard (rather stodgy) portraiture that everyone was apparently expecting. I like the pictures, myself…but I wouldn’t want them as official portraits of the teams. They look unfinished.

    in reply to: Finally–I had some images printed!! #48009
    chupathingie
    Participant

    …my DPI statement assumes of course that the original is high enough rez to support 300 DPI… so for 8X10 you need 2400X3000 minimum (~8MP), which is well within the resolution of most any recent P&S or DSLR. If the printer spits out your image at 150 DPI, you’re only getting 1/2 that resolution to the page regardless of the original’s pixel count.

    in reply to: Finally–I had some images printed!! #48007
    chupathingie
    Participant

    First question that comes to mind for me is what rez are they printed at? Some printers default to less-than-optimal DPI in my opinion… I specify 300DPI, their “default” looked to me to be more like 100DPI. I want to be able to see details up close, as well as from 6 feet away. I didn’t know until recently that Apple seems to share that philosophy; Retina Displays are 300DPI.

Viewing 15 posts - 181 through 195 (of 837 total)