Nabble - Photo Forum

Re: FS Slow motion camera

2009-11-25T12:39:49Z

Alberto,

I was away for a couple of days - somewhat uneventful - but vision
problems still with me - maybe hopefully the local medics taking care of me will
help with cataract surgery and "dry eye".

Anyway, i see no problem with forwarding info about the exilim - your intent is
to help others!

Andy

Alberto Tirado wrote:

> I hope its OK to post this - I am in no way related to the seller!
>
> I got notice of the sale of some photo-related items and among them is a Casio Exilim camera capable of "super-slow motion video". Since someone brought this very issue recently, I thought that perhaps there would be some interest in checking out: http://www.webvideouniversity.com/officesale.html
>
>
> **********************
> www.alberto-tirado.com
>
>
>
>

FS Slow motion camera

2009-11-25T08:28:12Z

I hope its OK to post this - I am in no way related to the seller!

I got notice of the sale of some photo-related items and among them is a Casio Exilim camera capable of "super-slow motion video". Since someone brought this very issue recently, I thought that perhaps there would be some interest in checking out: http://www.webvideouniversity.com/officesale.html

**********************
www.alberto-tirado.com

Re: Previous comment on my "Contrasts"

2009-11-25T04:22:50Z

Dan,

That puts the inclusion of the rest in a context I did not have. Now I
understand why all of that was included. The image is well done.

Mark Harris
gsphotoguy@...

<SNIP>
> As well as the tourists on the South bank, I included the water and the
> distant North side of the river Thames deliberately, since the area
> visible in the distance is probably the richest in London, in contrast to
> the real subject. This to my mind even more highlights the tremendous
> gulf between the "haves" and the "have-nots", especially in London - which
> was my intended message in this picture.
>
> Dan.
>

Re: Convert JPG files to PDF

2009-11-24T22:01:49Z

By the way, the convertion between .doc files and PDF files is also needed.

thanks in advance.

http://www.iconcool.com

Re: How long?

2009-11-24T18:36:13Z

My problem, is I don't remember when I first joined the group and was hoping
Andrew might tell me.

Take care out there,
Gregory
www.fireframeimaging.com
www.ebbtidegalleryofgifts.com
http://soundexposure.org

Re: How long?

2009-11-24T17:21:34Z

Me around that time, too. One of my first questions was about how to
shoot the images on computer monitors.
> Emily L. Ferguson wrote:
>> The first piece of email I have in my mail reader from the Photoforum
>> is in 1999. Jeez. 10 years. Amazing.

Re: Previous comment on my "Contrasts" pt 2

2009-11-24T05:22:20Z

I intended saying , best dressed for the task in hand.

How I hate it when my laptop decides when it wants to send my mail.

Michael in Norwich, England

Re: Previous comment on my "Contrasts"

2009-11-24T05:20:06Z

Within Dan's picture there is another contrast. The seated mendicant has a Nike bag behind him and his gloves or muff make him stand out as being one of the best dre

Previous comment on my "Contrasts"

2009-11-24T00:47:39Z

Mark Harris said -- "Contrasts - I see the contrast of haves and have-nots but feel the water adds nothing to that. You did a nice job capturing the people."

As well as the tourists on the South bank, I included the water and the distant North side of the river Thames deliberately, since the area visible in the distance is probably the richest in London, in contrast to the real subject. This to my mind even more highlights the tremendous gulf between the "haves" and the "have-nots", especially in London - which was my intended message in this picture.

Dan.

Re: How long?

2009-11-23T20:58:40Z

I spent Fall 1996 in London and am pretty sure I was a member then. I had just bought a Canon EOS Elan II, my first SLR, before leaving the US.

Roger

On 23 Nov 2009, at 12:49 PM, Emily L. Ferguson wrote:

> The first piece of email I have in my mail reader from the Photoforum is in 1999. Jeez. 10 years. Amazing.
> --
> Emily L. Ferguson
> mailto:elf@...
> 508-563-6822
> New England landscapes, wooden boats and races
> http://www.landsedgephoto.com
> http://e-and-s.instaproofs.com/
>

Re: EXIF editor for Mac OS X.

2009-11-23T18:51:43Z

Re: EXIF editor for Mac OS X. Hello Pablo.

Sorry for taking this long to reply.

GIMP is available for Mac OS X. All you have to do is install the X11 environment as part of your OS install and it will run under X11 (a front end GUI for UNIX). I chose not to install X11 when I installed OS X to save a little disk space. To install GIMP would require the kind of time I just don’t have at this moment. Another reason is that I am not sure if this effort will pay off since I am not sure that GIMP will in fact edit the EXIF metadata. I will keep in mind for the future and thank you for your suggestion.

Best regards,

Joseph

On 11/16/09 11:39 PM, "Pablo Coronel" <pablo.coronel.70@...> wrote:

Is there GIMP for MacOS?
there is a GIMP extension to do this

On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Joseph Chamberlain, D.D.S. <drjchamberlain@...> wrote:

I tried that at first but also realized that Adobe's products don't allow
you to change the EXIF data.

After a lot of research I have been able to make the edits I needed using
Graphic Converter which is a frontend application (Mac) for Phil Harvey's
exiftool application.

Thank you very much for your post and help.

Joseph

On 11/4/09 5:00 AM, "Emily L. Ferguson" <elf@...> wrote:

> Photoshop
> File>File Info or Cmd-Opt-Shft-I
>
> But you cannot change the info embedded by the camera.

Re: PF members exhibit on Nov 21, 2009

2009-11-23T16:42:04Z

Hi all,

Here are some of my thoughts:

<SNIP>
Subject: PF members exhibit on Nov 21, 2009

> The PhotoForum members' gallery/exhibit space was updated NOV 21, 2009.
> Authors
> with work now on display at: http://people.rit.edu/andpph/gallery.html
> include:
>
> Jim Snarski - Hummie

I like the composition of this image. I also like the blur in the wings.
This gives the sense of motion you don't always see in photographs of
hummingbirds.

> Christopher Strevens - Storm breakers at Rottingdean

If the intent was to focus our attention on the breakers then you have much
too much sky. The sun in the frame distracts from that too.

> Stephen Ylvisaker -

I feel that even less depth-of-field would have helped even if some of the
flowers were out of focus. You might have also moved some of the grasses out
of the way.

> Mark Harris - Inna at the Window

Thank you for the comments so far. I look forward to hearing from more of
you.

> John Palcewski - Sir Stephen Spender

An interesting background story. The well made portrait is all the better
with the information from your blog.

> Dan Mitchell - Contrasts

I see the contrast of haves and have-nots but feel the water adds nothing to
that. You did a nice job capturing the people.

> Don Roberts - Foggy Morn

I guess the choice is a straight horizon or tilted fence posts. I'm not sure
if this is the correct one but it is the choice you made. The field looks
like flowing water to me. That is a very nice touch.

>
<SNIP>
> From: Delilah and the whole PF exhibits staff

Thank you again for all of your dedicated work!

>
<SNIP>

Mark Harris
gsphotoguy@...
http://gsphotoguy.photography.com/

RE: [SPAM] Re: "By hand" and more Wm Mortensen.

2009-11-23T13:18:46Z

On Mon, November 23, 2009 14:38, lookaround360@... wrote:

> Damn Kodak for their slogan "You push the button - we do the rest." !

And the Jetsons, for showing how hard George had to work at his job!

> One of the core disciplines of all print making is repeatability.

Absolutely. It's a core part of the craft.

The variation is core knowledge the collectors need to understand.

> My print maker friends get all inked up and their output is "hand made."
> Same in the photo darkroom - wet, in the dark is good - ink jet printer
> is only a copy machine. Hence the idiotic word "GeeeClaaaay" - sounds
> arty cuz its french - for ink jet

I thought that died 5 or 10 years ago; are people still using the term?

> The fake and imitation have always been OK in art. Emulating the look of
> other photo or art media may be authentic if you think their look
> informs the idea you are going for even if only its a decorative effect.

Art is, after all, faking reality. Or at least imitating it.

> If you think photography is a form of drawing anything should go. I
> try and maintain a distance between "real", or "straight" photos for
> certain things I'm doing and drawings or mixed media effects. That is
> why Ed M's techniques appeal to me

I think it's reasonable to lump it all into "flat visual art". That's a
real enough category (many of the subcategories are interesting in their
own right, without ceasing to be part of the larger category).

--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@...; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

Re: How long?

2009-11-23T13:05:00Z

I retired in April of 1996 and I had been a member for a while before I retired. I believe that Douglas Ford Rea got me interested when he was a speaker at a University Photographer's Association symposium in Stephen's Point, WI.

Emily L. Ferguson wrote:

The first piece of email I have in my mail reader from the Photoforum is in 1999. Jeez. 10 years. Amazing.

RE: How long?

2009-11-23T12:49:53Z

The first piece of email I have in my mail reader from the Photoforum
is in 1999. Jeez. 10 years. Amazing.
--
Emily L. Ferguson
mailto:elf@...
508-563-6822
New England landscapes, wooden boats and races
http://www.landsedgephoto.com
http://e-and-s.instaproofs.com/

RE: tele converters

2009-11-23T12:38:20Z

Mark:

I think you are confusing close-up lenses with add-on convertors.

For example: the TL-H27 27mm 1.7x Telephoto Converter Lens for Canon Optura Digital Video Cameras is an add-on

lens that provides a 1.7x effect when connected to a main lens.

This particular on has a 27mm filter size but others are available in sizes up to 58mm I think,

Back to the original question about image quality differences between tele-convertors and add-on convertors; teleconvertors cost lens speed as you mention while add-on convertors seem not to.

I’m not at all sure regarding image quality between the two approaches.

Cheers,

James

From: owner-photoforum@... [mailto:owner-photoforum@...] On Behalf Of mark@...
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 11:54 AM
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
Subject: RE: tele converters

I suspect that there are two things you are a getting a bit confused, and that its easy to do.

One is to multiply the focal length (and I really don't necessarily like this analogy but its the best I can come up with before coffee) where you make a 200 mm lens have the magnification of a 400 mm lens (or a 2x) that goes between the lens and the body. These usually add some softness, but have some advantages and disadvantages. They take up a lot of light. The common ones are 1.4, 2.0 and 3.0 and they need, 1 stop, 2 stops or 3 stops of additional light. Not always a problem but occasionally is a major problem. Because of the nature of the glass, a 1.4 converter is usually sharper than a 2x and the 2x sharper than the 3x.

Close up or macro photography has a bit of a different challenge. They are designed to get the ability to let the lens focus closer than it would be able to do so otherwise. In many cases the challenge is to get something small the same size on film (or digital sensor) as it is in real life. There are 2 options there. The cheaper is close up filters that go on to the front of the lens. Because of the glass they tend to be softer than the other option, but they are much cheaper. The other method is called extension tubes which go between the lens and body. These are more expensive, especially on auto focus because the electronics have to pass through the tube. This is really just a hollow tube and has no effect on sharpness at close up distances (which is why its usually preferred) but it changes where a lens can focus by moving it away from the camera body. The longer tubes move the lens further away from the body and changes where the focus is.

RE: [SPAM] Re: "By hand" and more Wm Mortensen.

2009-11-23T12:38:03Z

David

Damn Kodak for their slogan "You push the button - we do the rest." !

One of the core disciplines of all print making is repeatability.
My print maker friends get all inked up and their output is "hand made."
Same in the photo darkroom - wet, in the dark is good - ink jet printer
is only a copy machine. Hence the idiotic word "GeeeClaaaay" - sounds
arty cuz its french - for ink jet

The fake and imitation have always been OK in art. Emulating the look of
other photo or art media may be authentic if you think their look
informs the idea you are going for even if only its a decorative effect.
If you think photography is a form of drawing anything should go. I
try and maintain a distance between "real", or "straight" photos for
certain things I'm doing and drawings or mixed media effects. That is
why Ed M's techniques appeal to me

AZ

LOOKAROUND - Since 1978
Build a 120/35mm Lookaround!
The Lookaround E-Book
FREE COPY
http://www.panoramacamera.us

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [SPAM] Re: "By hand" and more Wm Mortensen.
> From: David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@...>
> Date: Mon, November 23, 2009 12:53 pm
> To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
> <photoforum@...>
> On Mon, November 23, 2009 09:42, lookaround360@... wrote:
> > I was reminded while reading more on Wm Motensen that somehow using
> > light and chemical soup, whether an alchemist like WM was or an
> > empiricist like AA was, doing it "by hand" is popularly regarded more
> > worthy than by mouse. For me his work is an example that completes the
> > circle of so-called "hand" to digital art expression.
> The "by hand" is done per-print, the "by mouse" is done once per file and
> you can then print as many identical prints as you like. The hand prints
> are thus "more unique", and also cost more to make (including the time of
> the person doing the making). The inkjet prints are in some ways more
> like photomechanical reproductions (no inherent technological limit on
> quantity, VERY low print-to-print variation) than traditional art prints
> (where even for stone lithographs, stone wear is visible when you compare
> early and late prints in a run; woodcuts and metal etchings wear faster).
> None of which quite addresses "more worthy". It does to some extent
> justify higher prices. (Adams is an interesting case to include since
> while he did some limited portfolios, he didn't artificially limit print
> editions.)
> > I just got rid of the last odds n' ends of my darkroom stuff - gave it
> > all away. I have to say with no modesty that I was good at the darkroom.
> > It isn't rocket surgery. I am but a novice at anything but the most
> > routine PhotoShop skills. PS requires at the very least, an equal
> > amount of general technical skill and affords way more choices of
> > particular manual skills. It is by no means easy. Why do people persist
> > in devaluing art made with the aid of a computer?
> Same reason they devalue art made with a camera; anybody can push a button.
> I was fairly decent in the B&W darkroom, I thought. I was a better COLOR
> printer about 10 minutes into my learning experience with Corel Photo
> Paint than I'd ever been in the darkroom, though (and I do still have some
> of my own color darkroom prints in my collection).
> > I am not squeamish about using PS plug-ins. Are you? Is it less
> > worthy? Should or could the same result be gotten in the dark?
> I'm squeamish about artistic effects in photoshop. I'm not squeamish
> about Noise Ninja or Focus Magic, or the Kodak (originally Applied Science
> Fiction) ROC plugin, or Color Mechanic. There are some masking plugins
> that I'd like to try, but since they cost more than photoshop, and I
> suspect have the learning curve to match, I doubt I ever will. (Masking
> and blending modes and sharpening are my major areas of learning
> currently.)
> --
> David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@...; http://dd-b.net/
> Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
> Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
> Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

Re: "By hand" and more Wm Mortensen.

2009-11-23T09:53:25Z

On Mon, November 23, 2009 09:42, lookaround360@... wrote:
> I was reminded while reading more on Wm Motensen that somehow using
> light and chemical soup, whether an alchemist like WM was or an
> empiricist like AA was, doing it "by hand" is popularly regarded more
> worthy than by mouse. For me his work is an example that completes the
> circle of so-called "hand" to digital art expression.

The "by hand" is done per-print, the "by mouse" is done once per file and
you can then print as many identical prints as you like. The hand prints
are thus "more unique", and also cost more to make (including the time of
the person doing the making). The inkjet prints are in some ways more
like photomechanical reproductions (no inherent technological limit on
quantity, VERY low print-to-print variation) than traditional art prints
(where even for stone lithographs, stone wear is visible when you compare
early and late prints in a run; woodcuts and metal etchings wear faster).

None of which quite addresses "more worthy". It does to some extent
justify higher prices. (Adams is an interesting case to include since
while he did some limited portfolios, he didn't artificially limit print
editions.)

> I just got rid of the last odds n' ends of my darkroom stuff - gave it
> all away. I have to say with no modesty that I was good at the darkroom.
> It isn't rocket surgery. I am but a novice at anything but the most
> routine PhotoShop skills. PS requires at the very least, an equal
> amount of general technical skill and affords way more choices of
> particular manual skills. It is by no means easy. Why do people persist
> in devaluing art made with the aid of a computer?

Same reason they devalue art made with a camera; anybody can push a button.

I was fairly decent in the B&W darkroom, I thought. I was a better COLOR
printer about 10 minutes into my learning experience with Corel Photo
Paint than I'd ever been in the darkroom, though (and I do still have some
of my own color darkroom prints in my collection).

> I am not squeamish about using PS plug-ins. Are you? Is it less
> worthy? Should or could the same result be gotten in the dark?

I'm squeamish about artistic effects in photoshop. I'm not squeamish
about Noise Ninja or Focus Magic, or the Kodak (originally Applied Science
Fiction) ROC plugin, or Color Mechanic. There are some masking plugins
that I'd like to try, but since they cost more than photoshop, and I
suspect have the learning curve to match, I doubt I ever will. (Masking
and blending modes and sharpening are my major areas of learning
currently.)

--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@...; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info

Re: How long?

2009-11-23T09:29:42Z

Hi Andy,

It's good hearing from you. My husband just had eye surgery and now rarely
uses his glasses. He is color blind, but now even sees colors better than
before. You'll be just like new when your surgery is finished. I'm glad to
hear you are doing well.

I've got to hunt for something to photograph for my Christmas card now.
Hmmm. Maybe the puppy and kitten I just adopted will be good for something
besides sleepless nights after all{:->

Marilyn

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Davidhazy" <andpph@...>
To: "List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students"
<photoforum@...>
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 8:20 AM
Subject: RE: How long?

> Thank you Marilyn for your kind words. I am on a whirlwind visit to
> Seattle for a overall check-up plus a specific one for cataracts - I think
> eye surgery will take place in next couple of weeks. It is disconcerting
> and a pain to see everything through a fog so to speak. Take care, andy
>
> PS: If you all want to do the greeting cards project I think it could be
> done. Send cards as you would contributions to the gallery but place the
> word GREETINGS in the subject line.
>
> PS: PhotoForum started operation in late 1993 but at the time it was a
> manually rebroadcast activity. In early 1994 it became a "listserver"
> controlled list.
>
> ________________________________________
> From: owner-photoforum@...
> [owner-photoforum@...] On Behalf Of Marilyn
> [marilyn160@...]
> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 6:50 AM
> To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
> Subject: Re: How long?
>
> I believe I started corresponding with Photoforum around 1993 or 1994.
> I've met some amazing people through this venue and appreciate all that
> Andy and staff does to keep it going. Speaking of Andy - isn't it time
> for our annual "Bravo and a heartfelt thank you" to Andy and staff? Your
> work is so appreciated, Andy, and you truly provide an exciting,
> informational and fun venue for many people. We couldn't do without you.
>
> Are we doing Christmas cards this year?
>
> Marilyn
>

Re: How long?

2009-11-23T09:11:24Z

Andy,

If you find some time, we can meet for coffee. Although I live in Gig
Harbor, I make it too Seattle quite often. I can give you a tour where my
wife works at the NS-ICU at Harborview's Trauma Center.

Take care out there,
Gregory
www.fireframeimaging.com
www.ebbtidegalleryofgifts.com
http://soundexposure.org

RE: tele converters

2009-11-23T08:53:53Z

I suspect that there are two things you are a getting a bit confused, and that its easy to do.

Both are designed to make things bigger, just one makes it bigger close and the other at a distance.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: tele converters
From: MichaelHughes7A@...
Date: Mon, November 23, 2009 1:01 am
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
<photoforum@...>

There seem to be two approaches to multiplying the focal length of a lens.

The one that I am familiar with is the type which its between the camera body and the lens,

The other method is to use a supplementary lens which screws into the filter mount.

The second (outboard) method seems to be simpler and cheaper and quicker to change so I guess there must be a downside.

Your comments would be appreciated. Thank you. Michael

RE: How long?

2009-11-23T08:20:32Z

Thank you Marilyn for your kind words. I am on a whirlwind visit to Seattle for a overall check-up plus a specific one for cataracts - I think eye surgery will take place in next couple of weeks. It is disconcerting and a pain to see everything through a fog so to speak. Take care, andy

PS: If you all want to do the greeting cards project I think it could be done. Send cards as you would contributions to the gallery but place the word GREETINGS in the subject line.

PS: PhotoForum started operation in late 1993 but at the time it was a manually rebroadcast activity. In early 1994 it became a "listserver" controlled list.

________________________________________
From: owner-photoforum@... [owner-photoforum@...] On Behalf Of Marilyn [marilyn160@...]
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 6:50 AM
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
Subject: Re: How long?

I believe I started corresponding with Photoforum around 1993 or 1994. I've met some amazing people through this venue and appreciate all that Andy and staff does to keep it going. Speaking of Andy - isn't it time for our annual "Bravo and a heartfelt thank you" to Andy and staff? Your work is so appreciated, Andy, and you truly provide an exciting, informational and fun venue for many people. We couldn't do without you.

Are we doing Christmas cards this year?

Marilyn

"By hand" and more Wm Mortensen.

2009-11-23T07:42:18Z

I was reminded while reading more on Wm Motensen that somehow using
light and chemical soup, whether an alchemist like WM was or an
empiricist like AA was, doing it "by hand" is popularly regarded more
worthy than by mouse. For me his work is an example that completes the
circle of so-called "hand" to digital art expression.

I just got rid of the last odds n' ends of my darkroom stuff - gave it
all away. I have to say with no modesty that I was good at the darkroom.
It isn't rocket surgery. I am but a novice at anything but the most
routine PhotoShop skills. PS requires at the very least, an equal
amount of general technical skill and affords way more choices of
particular manual skills. It is by no means easy. Why do people persist
in devaluing art made with the aid of a computer?

I am not squeamish about using PS plug-ins. Are you? Is it less
worthy? Should or could the same result be gotten in the dark?

More MM stuff:

http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/Mortensen/mortensen.html
http://www.artnet.com/artist/682224/william-mortensen.html
http://photo.net/photography-education-forum/005fZU

AZ

LOOKAROUND - Since 1978
Build a 120/35mm Lookaround!
The Lookaround E-Book
FREE COPY
http://www.panoramacamera.us

Re: How long?

2009-11-23T03:50:29Z

I believe I started corresponding with Photoforum around 1993 or 1994. I've met some amazing people through this venue and appreciate all that Andy and staff does to keep it going. Speaking of Andy - isn't it time for our annual "Bravo and a heartfelt thank you" to Andy and staff? Your work is so appreciated, Andy, and you truly provide an exciting, informational and fun venue for many people. We couldn't do without you.

Are we doing Christmas cards this year?

Marilyn

----- Original Message -----

From: MichaelHughes7A@...

To: photoforum@...

Sent: Sunday, November 22, 2009 10:49 PM

Subject: Re: How long?

In a message dated 23/11/2009 01:43:35 GMT Standard Time, fyrframe@... writes:

I would be interested in learning how long I've been a member of this forum?
Anyone else?

Why would we, just good to have you around, Gregory. Michael

tele converters

2009-11-22T23:01:34Z

There seem to be two approaches to multiplying the focal length of a lens.

The one that I am familiar with is the type which its between the camera body and the lens,

The other method is to use a supplementary lens which screws into the filter mount.

The second (outboard) method seems to be simpler and cheaper and quicker to change so I guess there must be a downside.

Your comments would be appreciated. Thank you. Michael

Re: How long?

2009-11-22T22:49:57Z

In a message dated 23/11/2009 01:43:35 GMT Standard Time, fyrframe@... writes:

I would be interested in learning how long I've been a member of this forum?
Anyone else?

Why would we, just good to have you around, Gregory. Michael

Convert JPG files to PDF

2009-11-22T19:11:13Z

I want to convert some files in JPG and GIF to PDF files. And there may are a large number of files, so which tool is much convenient?

Thanks in advance.

http://www.iconcool.com

Re: Photoshop Work Flow / Well another day, another day on the phone

2009-11-22T17:53:19Z

On 11/22/09 8:23 PM, PhotoRoy6@... wrote:
> I'll look for it. I used workspaces in PS 7.0 to navigate large
> distances by having about ten workspaces saved

>
Not sure what you mean about navigating long distances. Do you mean
from folder to folder, perhaps? If so, in Bridge I have four tabs set
up in the left column - Folders, Filters, Metadata and Keywords.

To see Metadata for any image I just click on the image and click on the
Metadata Tab to see the info. To get from one folder to another I just
click on the Folders Tab and my entire computer's folder structure is
then accessible. To sort through the images I use the various options
in the Filters Tab - one can sort by keyword, by orientation of image,
by date of image, by colorspace, by number of stars - you name it you
can pretty much sort by it.

But my workspace is with the Tabs in a single column on the left, a film
strip across the bottom, and the large image above the film strip. I do
not use a column on the right side. By dragging the Tab for any Tab
that comes up on the Right over to the left side, I eliminate the Right
column.

Re: Photoshop Work Flow / Well another day, another day on the phone

2009-11-22T17:38:29Z

This should read I can't get them both open at the same time which is what browser does.

In a message dated 11/22/2009 8:29:09 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, PhotoRoy6@... writes:

can get them both open at the same time which is what browser does.

How long?

2009-11-22T17:33:59Z

I would be interested in learning how long I've been a member of this forum?
Anyone else?

Take care out there,
Gregory
www.fireframeimaging.com
www.ebbtidegalleryofgifts.com
http://soundexposure.org

Re: Photoshop Work Flow / Well another day, another day on the phone

2009-11-22T17:23:46Z

I'll look for it. I used workspaces in PS 7.0 to navigate large distances by having about ten workspaces saved

In a message dated 11/21/2009 7:01:42 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, elf@... writes:

once you have your workspace set up exactly the way you want it, save
it. There's a command somewhere (my computer's dead so I cant' recall
exactly which menu it's in, but it's there). Call it Roy's workspace,
and then when the windows get all messed up just select it and
everything goes back to the way you customized it.

these applications are extremely powerful. Poke around in all the menus
when something seems kludgy and look for the possible solution!

Re: Photoshop Work Flow / Well another day, another day on the phone

2009-11-22T17:21:19Z

I can get them both open at the same time which is what browser does.

In a message dated 11/21/2009 7:01:40 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, elf@... writes:

Drag the tabs so they're all in the same trough.

Re: WW2 pics - any suggestions?

2009-11-22T14:04:11Z

At 04:50 PM 11/22/2009, you wrote:

On 22/11/2009 19:36, "Chris" <cjrs@...> wrote:

The file was too big to send. Do you have a FAX number to send them to. They are black and white.

Chris

You can use YouSendIt to send really large files. It's free. I use it all the time:

http://www.yousendit.com/

Tina

Tina Manley
www.tinamanley.com

Re: WW2 images

2009-11-22T13:57:50Z

Re: WW2 images Thanks Trevor, I was kind of thinking along the lines of staging images, in as far as getting the kids to pose in a way that could be cut out and stuck onto an original period photograph (whether that be a war scene, or a ‘home front’ type situation). Staging a whole image may be tricky in terms of props/background etc.

I also thought I might just get them to do old style studio portraits, as then I don’t need to worry about back ground so much (can just use some cloth etc).

All looks like fun though. Will let you know how I get on with kar2ouch.

Cheers,

Jonathan.

On 22/11/2009 19:52, "Trevor Cunningham" <trevor@...> wrote:

Kar2ouche seems to be a big button school tool that requires minimal instruction. Let me know how the sepia goes. Why not have the kids try to stage replica images of the events you're aiming for? A little imagination goes a long way to reaching them and relieving you.

jonathan turner wrote:

WW2 images Hi,

Apologies for my delayed reply... Been away for a couple of days (in very wet Cumbria, UK)

Many thanks for all your input regarding obtaining WW2 images for the educational project I'm working on. There's some useful links and stuff there for me.

Trevor - no the kids don't have PS access. All they have is something called Kar2ouch. Ever heard of it? I've not yet had a chance to use it so not sure what it's capable of. I need to turn the photos sepia, so hope it can do that at the very least. Also, in answer to your question about my site; I don't know how it was built (floating or I frame etc) I just paid some one to build it for me. But yes, simplicity was what I wanted, so thanks for your comments.

And thanks to Michael too for your thoughts on my site.

Thanks once again.

Jonathan.

--
Jonathan Turner
Photographer

e: pictures@...
t: 0113 217 1275
m:07796 470573

7 Scott Hall Walk, Leeds, LS7 3JQ

http://www.jonathan-turner.com

--
Jonathan Turner
Photographer

e: pictures@...
t: 0113 217 1275
m:07796 470573

7 Scott Hall Walk, Leeds, LS7 3JQ

http://www.jonathan-turner.com

Re: WW2 pics - any suggestions?

2009-11-22T13:50:24Z

Re: WW2 pics - any suggestions? Hi Chris, sadly I don’t have a fax. Perhaps you could save it as a slightly smaller image, or smaller quality jpeg?

I appreciate the effort you’ve gone to Chris,

Many thanks.

Jonathan.

On 22/11/2009 19:36, "Chris" <cjrs@...> wrote:

The file was too big to send. Do you have a FAX number to send them to. They are black and white.

Chris

From: owner-photoforum@... [owner-photoforum@...] On Behalf Of jonathan turner
Sent: 22 November 2009 10:17
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
Subject: Re: WW2 pics - any suggestions?

Hi Chris, anything on the home front or Blitz would be great!

Cheers,

Jonathan.

On 22/11/2009 08:06, "Chris" <cjrs@...> wrote:

I will scan some and e-mail them to you if you like. I only have the home front and the blitz not the death camps as they were taken from me.

Chris

From: owner-photoforum@... [owner-photoforum@...] On Behalf Of Trevor Cunningham
Sent: 19 November 2009 17:04
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
Subject: Re: WW2 pics - any suggestions?

Jonathan,

Did you use a floating, or i, frame for your website? I like its simplicity.

jonathan turner wrote:

Hi,

I'm doing a project in a school based on the idea of using Photography as a catalyst to improve literacy. The school are doing World War 2 as their terms theme, so we plan to get the kids to take pictures of each other and then cut them selves out and stick onto a WW2 scene, which they can then make into a postcard and write on the back of.

I need some WW2 pictures from the internet (ideally anything to do with 'the home front', or the blitz, or evacuation but any will do really). The problem is that pictures off the net are never high enough resolution to   print from and therefore difficult to use for this purpose.

Has anyone any suggestions - either a web page that has good quality resolution pictures or some good books I can easily get hold of, or good tips for projecting the images and then photographing the kids in front of them?

Any help   appreciated.

Cheers,

Jonathan.
--
Jonathan   Turner
Photographer

e: pictures@...
t: 0113 217 1275
m:07796 470573

7 Scott Hall Walk, Leeds, LS7 3JQ

http://www.jonathan-turner.com

--
Jonathan Turner
Photographer

e: pictures@...
t: 0113 217 1275
m:07796 470573

7 Scott Hall Walk, Leeds, LS7 3JQ

http://www.jonathan-turner.com

--
Jonathan Turner
Photographer

e: pictures@...
t: 0113 217 1275
m:07796 470573

7 Scott Hall Walk, Leeds, LS7 3JQ

http://www.jonathan-turner.com