[ravnostic]

I did edit out the well known/recognizable part of the theme description, btw. I added the part about photos looking like they could be on a travel brochure.

**like** 🙂

[ravnostic]

On another front, there’s nothing wrong in the rulebook about resizing an image down to, say 320×240 and then posting at 640×480, is there?

Intentional pixelization?

Kinda. Giving it a 1960’s travel brochure quality, a ‘printed copy’ feel. (I hope). But that might translate into ‘cartoonish’, by f’tog standards. I can, of course, post them full[er] quality, if that’s the call.

Example:

Not much different from what a cell phone of 5 years ago would capture, except I took it with a DSLR.

[ravnostic]

Not quite the same, but along parallel lines; was trying to come up with info for my pics in “It’s on the travel brochure” and visited wikipedia, because–you know–they’re the leading authority.

Their dam picture:

And my picture:

//meant to look this way//

It’s obvious that the hacks desaturated, sharpened, and rotated the image from my albums. Because I was on a public perch, and there’s no chance that anyone else could have taken that picture from exactly that angle (my left heel was on a pebble, and that gave me an unique angle)

[ravnostic]

In general, if we want the photos evaluated for the cohesive whole, then we should go to posting all three in the same post. However, I think at this point for this theme, we should leave it be, particularly as a number of people will not be expecting a requirement that all three photos be from the same city or region.

This thought crossed my mind, but in the past I’ve found resistance to the idea of 3 images in one post (or at least I disremember so), because people like their stats consistent with 3 posts each week. Then there could be 3 posts of 3 images, but getting 9 shots in a week seems to be a bit much, in my mind.

A lot of non-regulars barely manage to even post one picture with any ease, let alone post 3 in the same panel. Love the idea; but it seems like a logistical nightmare that would throw people off.

________________________________________________________________

On another front, there’s nothing wrong in the rulebook about resizing an image down to, say 320×240 and then posting at 640×480, is there?

[ravnostic]

1) I am posting 3 images from the same area.
2) Others here seem to be liking the idea of posting 3 images from the same area.
3) As the theme originator, I’d like to see 3 images from the same area, and that was the general idea when I originated the theme as “Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, etcetera.”
4) A travel brochure will generally have several images from the same area.

…but you are free to post images from 3 different places across the globe, if that’s what you’ve got. Just don’t blame me if the voter’s don’t warm up to them.

[ravnostic]

We had a graffitti theme. Perhaps revisit it – The writing’s on the wall?

Orionid’s got one in the hopper that includes graffiti, “Urban Art” (which I hope is due to be scheduled soon–perfect to try out the new 50mm!)

[ravnostic]

Eeek, QueenBee! iy-carumba! I’d say they’d get the point (and it should get some serious votes, too). I’d love to see three shots from the same region, but don’t want Elsinore to have to police all the entries for that (and how would we know, except in gross examples?). If E. wants to police it, fine, though.

[ravnostic]

So how famous and recognizable are we talking about for this? If I was to do something from DC does it have to be some very recognizable landmark like the whitehouse or can it be of lesser known monuments or neighborhoods that most people might not instantly know is DC without a caption and just say its DC?

The theme says ‘well known’, but I can’t see everyone having been to the Eiffel, the Sphinx, the WTC, etc. And as a person who’s spent my time in hotels in not-so-well known places, I can say for certain that lots of them have put together a travel brochure–this may be especially true of shots from places well known in a particular region, but not much beyond it.

I’m all for putting up pictures that could be from a travel brochure, even if it’s not something to whole world would recognize. In fact, due to my lack of desire to drive 5 hours each way for pictures of either the Grand Canyon or Hoover Dam, I’m going with more regionally known images myself–my location was selected from the plethora of T.B.’s I glanced through at a kiosk in Scottsdale, Az.

Maybe we should amend the description a bit, editing out the “well known to most people” bit? Thoughts?

[ravnostic]

The profile seems to be blocked from my view, at least, Uran I take it he stole your goodies?

[ravnostic]

I liked the macro tips. But they had me with the front page image of the two *hawt* photography guys. 😉

[ravnostic]

Thanks for the tip, ELO, and the words of experience from the rest of you. Kestrana add to your ‘potential’ list ‘top sales person’, perhaps? Some of the best sales people are the ones who negate a customer’s belief in their right to a refund or replacement. Just not THIS customer. 🙂

[ravnostic]

I’ll bet, caradoc That’s my favorite shot of yours. You should be selling that one.

[ravnostic]

caradoc–one of the fears I have with ordering online is whether the colors will come out the way I want them/expect them to be. I like the idea of seeing a test copy before the large image is printed. That being said, if what I’ve given them turns out to be correct for what I want the end result to be, I may likely order more copies through Blue Cube. If I really like how it turns out without them having to alter what I’ve submitted to them, I might go hunt down a place to hang it and offer limited prints, some coffee shop in Tempe or some such (I’ll be back to ask about that if so).

Curious–perhaps I will!

[ravnostic]

glad everything work out for you rav.

I just hope the prints I originally went for come out as spectacularly as I imagine they can. If so, I’ll be a happy man. I will want to post images of them if so, but then–how do you post an image of a fantasically mounted/printed picture and capture the reason why it is so? So…probably won’t. But I’ll at least mention it.

[ravnostic]

Well, live and learn–my original lenses came with the camera so I’d never bought one. I did question the mount and if it would fit–they did slap it on to an EOS, but then slapped it right back off–I didn’t inspect it (my bad). I’m glad they relented and gave me a new lens. I did wind up going back later and bought another, a 75-300 mm f/4-5.6 canon brand telephoto; which I DID inspect (once bitten as I’d said–and it’s far better build than the 50mm) and taken a few snaps with my camera while I waited the first time around; having gone home, looked at the images on the ‘puter, compared to my Tamron; I found the image a good bit sharper, with the same CA, but more evident due to add’l clarity–but with the Canon brand I can correct for this considerably using DPP–can’t do that wit the Tamron. Used, it was $139 (it’s not the fast focus one (USL?)–they had that for more–but then my Tamron isn’t either). I can sell the Tamron on ebay for $60-90, history shows, so that works out less than the 50mm.

[Author]

Posts