 | |
Dilemma. My pictures are too good.
Printers Technical discussion of printers (comp.periphs.printers)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#11
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Dilemma. My pictures are too good. -
05-21-2007
, 11:17 AM
|
Frank Arthur wrote: Dilemma My pictures are too good. I've got a digital camera that can shoot in rapid sequence. Please tell me you aren't considering DX lenses "good" are you? If so, you've got a lot to learn. |
DX Nikkor Lenses for DX Format Digital SLRs
10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor
12-24mm f/4G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED II AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor
18-135mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor - NEW!
18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor
17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
55-200mm f/4.5-5.6G ED AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor - NEW!
Quote:
|
Rita |
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
"M-M" <nospam.m-m (AT) ny (DOT) more> wrote in message news:nospam.m-m-C7593A.21540720052007 (AT) newsread (DOT) uslec.net... In article <4K34i.4636$Hk.2474 (AT) bignews8 (DOT) bellsouth.net>, "Frank Arthur" <Art (AT) Arthurian (DOT) com> wrote: I can't readily print it without being forced to crop and lose part of the image because Photo Paper is proportioned 4:5. Sheesh. Crop the paper to 7x10.5 -- m-m And "sheesh" put it in a 7 x 10.5 frame? You find them everywhere:- |
No!
You use a matt and put them in a bigger frame.
Your record seems to have got stuck, and keeps repeating the same old
phrase. I think a K.U.T.A. is needed to get it to move on.
Roy G
#13
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Frank Arthur" <Art (AT) Arthurian (DOT) com> wrote in message news:msj4i.18$FN5.0 (AT) bignews7 (DOT) bellsouth.net... "M-M" <nospam.m-m (AT) ny (DOT) more> wrote in message news:nospam.m-m-C7593A.21540720052007 (AT) newsread (DOT) uslec.net... In article <4K34i.4636$Hk.2474 (AT) bignews8 (DOT) bellsouth.net>, "Frank Arthur" <Art (AT) Arthurian (DOT) com> wrote: I can't readily print it without being forced to crop and lose part of the image because Photo Paper is proportioned 4:5. Sheesh. Crop the paper to 7x10.5 -- m-m And "sheesh" put it in a 7 x 10.5 frame? You find them everywhere:- No! You use a matt and put them in a bigger frame. Your record seems to have got stuck, and keeps repeating the same old phrase. I think a K.U.T.A. is needed to get it to move on. Roy G |
10.5
then make a custom mat and frame them?
#14
| |||
| |||
|
|
Dilemma My pictures are too good. |
Where can you go when you've already reached the point where you're
just too good at what you do?
How about trying something else?
Maybe Barber College?
--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!
Hillary Clinton asked her supporters on the
Internet to select her campaign theme song.
She cheerfully promised the nation not to sing
the song herself. When Hillary Clinton sings,
she sounds like a cat on its way to the tennis
racket factory.
#15
| |||
| |||
|
|
My pictures are too good. Yes, that's certainly a dillema. Where can you go when you've already reached the point where you're just too good at what you do? How about trying something else? Maybe Barber College? |
age.
#16
| |||
| |||
|
|
Dilemma My pictures are too good. I've got a digital camera that can shoot in rapid sequence. [blah blah blah] |
Dude, give it a rest. Just print at whatever ratio you want and trim the
paper. Or crop, or something. Going on teh interweb and whining about it
just clogs up the tubes.
#17
| |||
| |||
|
|
Dilemma My pictures are too good. I've got a digital camera that can shoot in rapid sequence. I'm using VR zoom lenses of high quality and autofocus instantly. I can now compose in the viewfinder, zoom to fill the frame and rip off 2,3, 10 images in seconds. Hard not to get a good well composed, well exposed, well framed image. That's the dilemma. I finally got the "ultimate" technique down pat thanks to the new technologies. I can't print that well cropped image because the proportions of the Digital image is 2:3 but I can't readily print it without being forced to crop and lose part of the image because Photo Paper is proportioned 4:5. Until recently because of the Camera/Lens limitations we tended to shoot and include much more of the subject knowing we would crop later. We had to because we simply couldn't compose accurately enough fast enough. Now that you can achieve in camera cropping with frequent success we are able to make use of all the pixels we see leading to a better sharper overall image. Now we need to make use of Photo Paper to match our image media which cries out for a 8 x 12 Photo Paper size. Epson or HP do not produce Photo Paper with 2:3 ratio yet (except for their 4x6 size). This will happen when customers ask for it. Believe it or not there are anti-8 x 12 Photo Paper posters out there too. |
After giving this some thoiught, I am willing to put my personal
safety in jeopardy by revealing the secret committee that will address
your concern.
This Committee is secret, and very jealous of its power and control
which demands this secrecy. Thus, I am at grave risk of having my
credentials as a photographer (such as they are) being revoked with
extreme prejudice. You will understand if I don't reveal *ALL* of the
Committee's secrets.
The Committee is headquartered in Belgium, with individual Members
spread throughout the world. The Committee evaluates are questions
regarding all aspects of photography, including photographic paper
sizes, and therefore has the authority to look into your concerns.
However, first your claim to have reached the level of photography
where you can say, "My pictures are too good" will need to be
verified.
To do this, you will need to post photos (at full resolution and best
quality) at least ten (10) photos you consider to be representative of
your claim in each the following categories:
Glamour (not to be confused with porn)
Portrait
Transportation
Sports
Weather
Pets
Nature
Wildflowers
Mountains
Lakes
Happiness
Gloom
The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse
Stuffed Toys
Politics (no cheap shots)
Communication
Macro (1:1, not mere close-up shots)
Porn (not to be confused with Glamour)
(Other members of the Committee may require photos in other
categories, as they see fit.)
These photos must be posted to a Website available to the public at
your expense; since the members of the Committee are not known to the
public, the photographs must be available to all.
I will further endanger myself by revealing the identy of a few
Committee members:
RichA; he will disqualify any photos taken with any gear that has
plastic in it; beware that many aspherical lens elements are made of
resin, which RichA considers to be plastic.
Rita; she will disqualify any photos that are not taken with certain
"legendary" lenses. Which lenses reach that level of perfectuon are
determined by Rita alone.
If the Committee decides that you have indeed reached the level of
photography where your photos are, indeed, too good for the paper
sizes commonly available, then, and only then, will it recommend that
the various paper manufacturers alter their manufacturing process so
that photographic papers match the current sensor size ratios.
The Committee (and the world) awaits your evidentiary photos.
--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!
Hillary Clinton asked her supporters on the
Internet to select her campaign theme song.
She cheerfully promised the nation not to sing
the song herself. When Hillary Clinton sings,
she sounds like a cat on its way to the tennis
racket factory.
#18
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Sun, 20 May 2007 18:13:28 -0400, "Frank Arthur" <Art (AT) Arthurian (DOT) com wrote: Dilemma My pictures are too good. I've got a digital camera that can shoot in rapid sequence. I'm using VR zoom lenses of high quality and autofocus instantly. I can now compose in the viewfinder, zoom to fill the frame and rip off 2,3, 10 images in seconds. Hard not to get a good well composed, well exposed, well framed image. That's the dilemma. I finally got the "ultimate" technique down pat thanks to the new technologies. I can't print that well cropped image because the proportions of the Digital image is 2:3 but I can't readily print it without being forced to crop and lose part of the image because Photo Paper is proportioned 4:5. Until recently because of the Camera/Lens limitations we tended to shoot and include much more of the subject knowing we would crop later. We had to because we simply couldn't compose accurately enough fast enough. Now that you can achieve in camera cropping with frequent success we are able to make use of all the pixels we see leading to a better sharper overall image. Now we need to make use of Photo Paper to match our image media which cries out for a 8 x 12 Photo Paper size. Epson or HP do not produce Photo Paper with 2:3 ratio yet (except for their 4x6 size). This will happen when customers ask for it. Believe it or not there are anti-8 x 12 Photo Paper posters out there too. Perhaps I was too hasty in my previous response. After giving this some thoiught, I am willing to put my personal safety in jeopardy by revealing the secret committee that will address your concern. This Committee is secret, and very jealous of its power and control which demands this secrecy. Thus, I am at grave risk of having my credentials as a photographer (such as they are) being revoked with extreme prejudice. You will understand if I don't reveal *ALL* of the Committee's secrets. The Committee is headquartered in Belgium, with individual Members spread throughout the world. The Committee evaluates are questions regarding all aspects of photography, including photographic paper sizes, and therefore has the authority to look into your concerns. However, first your claim to have reached the level of photography where you can say, "My pictures are too good" will need to be verified. To do this, you will need to post photos (at full resolution and best quality) at least ten (10) photos you consider to be representative of your claim in each the following categories: Glamour (not to be confused with porn) Portrait Transportation Sports Weather Pets Nature Wildflowers Mountains Lakes Happiness Gloom The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse Stuffed Toys Politics (no cheap shots) Communication Macro (1:1, not mere close-up shots) Porn (not to be confused with Glamour) (Other members of the Committee may require photos in other categories, as they see fit.) These photos must be posted to a Website available to the public at your expense; since the members of the Committee are not known to the public, the photographs must be available to all. I will further endanger myself by revealing the identy of a few Committee members: RichA; he will disqualify any photos taken with any gear that has plastic in it; beware that many aspherical lens elements are made of resin, which RichA considers to be plastic. Rita; she will disqualify any photos that are not taken with certain "legendary" lenses. Which lenses reach that level of perfectuon are determined by Rita alone. If the Committee decides that you have indeed reached the level of photography where your photos are, indeed, too good for the paper sizes commonly available, then, and only then, will it recommend that the various paper manufacturers alter their manufacturing process so that photographic papers match the current sensor size ratios. The Committee (and the world) awaits your evidentiary photos. -- THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY! Hillary Clinton asked her supporters on the Internet to select her campaign theme song. She cheerfully promised the nation not to sing the song herself. When Hillary Clinton sings, she sounds like a cat on its way to the tennis racket factory. |
See his new thread.
With a lot of luck perhaps my opposite approach might make him go away and
stay away.
Roy G
#19
| |||
| |||
|
|
On May 20, 6:13 pm, "Frank Arthur" <A... (AT) Arthurian (DOT) com> wrote: Dilemma My pictures are too good. I've got a digital camera that can shoot in rapid sequence. I'm using VR zoom lenses of high quality and autofocus instantly. I can now compose in the viewfinder, zoom to fill the frame and rip off 2,3, 10 images in seconds. Hard not to get a good well composed, well exposed, well framed image. That's the dilemma. I finally got the "ultimate" technique down pat thanks to the new technologies. I can't print that well cropped image because the proportions of the Digital image is 2:3 but I can't readily print it without being forced to crop and lose part of the image because Photo Paper is proportioned 4:5. Until recently because of the Camera/Lens limitations we tended to shoot and include much more of the subject knowing we would crop later. We had to because we simply couldn't compose accurately enough fast enough. Now that you can achieve in camera cropping with frequent success we are able to make use of all the pixels we see leading to a better sharper overall image. Now we need to make use of Photo Paper to match our image media which cries out for a 8 x 12 Photo Paper size. Epson or HP do not produce Photo Paper with 2:3 ratio yet (except for their 4x6 size). This will happen when customers ask for it. Believe it or not there are anti-8 x 12 Photo Paper posters out there too. Yes, if you print 8x10 you have to crop, just the way it is, but you can print at approx 7.4x 10.5 on 8.5x11 paper and it will give you a full frame, or use 11x17 paper for 8x12, yes a 10x14 sheet would be better but for some reason inkjets are locked into traditional paper printing sizes. |
for a 3:2 SLR image. And I can get standard frames & matts for them.
--
Paul Furman Photography
http://www.edgehill.net/1
Bay Natives Nursery
http://www.baynatives.com
#20
| |||
| |||
|
|
the Committee |
You should capitalize 'The' in 'The Committee' !!!
tsk tsk tsk...
:-)
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.