olavf

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 931 through 945 (of 1,591 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: 06-30-10 – Rain, Rain, Go Away #28845
    olavf
    Participant

    We won’t be getting any rain until Nov/Dec sometime most likely, and even then it only seems to rain while I’m at work, or at night, so I wouldn’t worry about it too much.

    That said, I’ve got some b-sides, and a few things I tried to get after this one hit the hopper. Like rav, probably not any show-stoppers, but I’ll have something to contribute. Kat’s been trying the same thing, but I’m not sure what she’s got to work with.
    /we don’t get very photogenic rain, when we *do* get it.

    in reply to: 06-16-10 – Monumental #28768
    olavf
    Participant

    Vortex_Dweller, gotcha. Yeah, that’s a different animal. Plus for us, PS means two seats, unless we’re willing to fight the kids for computer time on the desktop, and that gets a bit steep. I might think differently if one, or both, of us were making money off it, but as things sit I think we’re better off spending our meager camera budget on glass or other tools for taking pictures. :/

    in reply to: 06-16-10 – Monumental #28765
    olavf
    Participant

    Oh I just read this thread … well I feel real smart now for adding captions and pops to bigger. I guess my thought regarding pops to the bigger is that my image inline gets Flickerized to the smaller 540 pixel dimension. I haven’t yet found how to export at a specific pixel dimension from Aperture 3 – maybe it’s possible but if it’s not then until I buy whatever version of the photoshops I settle on then I’m not even up to the 640 size in the thread. Hurts worse with landscape oriented images, like the galveston grave doors I put up.

    If all you’re looking to do is basic stuff, check out The Gimp – Open Source, and pretty darn powerful, though it’s interface can be a little clunky at times. I think it’s only real drawback is that it doesn’t handle 16-bit images IIRC.

    We use Canon’s Digital Pro tools for most of our post-processing, and then run the jpegs through Gimp to do the final outputs – rotating, scaling, etc.

    in reply to: 06-16-10 – Monumental #28750
    olavf
    Participant

    My supervisor got back to me on email and allowed me to take an early night! (YAY!) I’ve posted my two and I’m off to bed to catch at least a couple of Z’s before heading to the hospital. I’ll see what I can do about getting to a computer to vote on the pictures before the contest closes.

    Good luck, and congrats!

    in reply to: 06-16-10 – Monumental #28747
    olavf
    Participant

    We’re never tourists in our own towns.

    We make an effort of it, but in a lot of ways, the stuff we really want to be touristy about are a mere 45 minutes to an hour away. And, we never go :/

    We haven’t been to the wine country since October, and Tahoe, well, I haven’t been there in several years 😛

    in reply to: 06-16-10 – Monumental #28743
    olavf
    Participant

    Most laptops tend to be a bit on the smaller side – Mine, for example, is 1280×800. LCDs in general are lower res than CRTs though. OTOH, the reduction in pixels is a fair trade-off for the reduction in headaches from the CRT flicker 😛

    in reply to: 06-16-10 – Monumental #28738
    olavf
    Participant

    It comes down to a question of what the voters are voting on. The photo you posted or the photo you link/pop-link to or a combination of the two?

    that how i feel about the ubiquitous “pops to bigger” that we see so much of. hell yeah all our entries look better bigger but the contest in held on fark with a 640 pixel width and 200KB file size.

    and any captions added are to enhance the image 99% of the time. and therefore should be against the rules.

    mumble mumble mumble

    I hear what you’re saying, but I’m going to continue to have the click to see larger, because, well, dammit, 640 is too damned small to judge a photo. It just is. I wish everyone would link to a larger one.

    If anything gets an unfair advantage, it’s the photos that are vertical and therefore larger on the page, so they get the enlargement without the user having to go to any effort. If we’re going to go by fark’s limit of 640 horizontal, I think 640 should be the max length on any side.

    FWIW I limit my vertical pictures to 700 pixels high, because most monitors (especially laptops) aren’t more than 768px high. And I have a really hard time appreciating a picture, personally, if I have to scroll to see the whole thing.

    But I agree – I often wish people had linked to a larger picture. Especially those folks that post little more than thumbnails 😛

    in reply to: External flash for Nikon D5000 #27948
    olavf
    Participant

    I disagree. It’s your wifely duty to take it out of the box and make sure it’s fully functional before you give him such a gift…

    😉

    in reply to: 06-16-10 – Monumental #28705
    olavf
    Participant

    I would think a totem pole would/should count. I don’t think natural monuments/parks were what Kestrana was going for, but she can clarify. Maybe we need to put “man-made” in there if that’s the case…

    I wasn’t thinking “parks” but rather specific geologic locations and historic sites that have a “National Monument” status. It’s a pretty short list.

    But, I’m cool with keeping natural formations out. I can save my idea for the ‘mountains, etc’ contest whenever it gets scheduled.

    in reply to: 06-16-10 – Monumental #28699
    olavf
    Participant

    I remember reading about that. Quite a bummer.

    That’s been a National Park, not a monument for a number of years though. I was referring more to this list:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Monuments_of_the_United_States

    in reply to: 06-16-10 – Monumental #28697
    olavf
    Participant

    Are “natural” monuments acceptable? You know, like “Such and Such National Monument”?

    I have a great idea, but I can save it for another contest if no.

    in reply to: 06-09-10 – By the Numbers #28676
    olavf
    Participant

    Congrats 🙂

    in reply to: 06-09-10 – By the Numbers #28667
    olavf
    Participant

    Yeah, Dad’s actual Quick Silver acct was deactivated when he passed, so you can’t even see it anymore.

    You know, that’s kind of sad. There should be a way to memorialize people’s contributions, and we should be able to see stuff that folks left behind.

    I really hate the thought that when I pass, people will start deconstructing and erasing the traces I’ve left online over the years. I’d say it sort of feels like grave-robbing, in a weird sort of way.

    I try not to think about it too much, because what else will there be left of me? :/

    in reply to: 06-09-10 – By the Numbers #28666
    olavf
    Participant

    Howdy Folks. I joined this party a little late. Rock N Roll. Now I’ve infected this group as well bwuhahahahahaa! 😀

    haha just you wait. It’s actually the other way around, sucker 😉

    Welcome aboard!

    in reply to: 06-02-10 – Macro Bugs #27740
    olavf
    Participant

    no, U-Man you’re probably right. :/ I mean, I did take a self-portrait for ‘heebie-jeebies’ and all…

    I love the macro stuff, but I really want to get something wide-angle though. I was drooling over those Canon 10-24mm’s this morning 😛

Viewing 15 posts - 931 through 945 (of 1,591 total)