Thanks, ann, lower left made it for me too. :-)
When I went to Disneyland last year, I did something I hadn't done before in
all my previous trips. I watched the parade from beginning to end, I watched
their nightly show from beginning to end, and I caught as many live shows as
I could.
On 05/10/07, Walter Hamler, discombobulated, unleashed:
Has she seen that? ;-)
Yep, right after I shot it. Her reply was, you need to be closer to the
oranges to make them bigger! ;-)
Walt
Have you ever seen the original 'The Italian Job'? Right now I've got
this vision of you in my head
Gigapan (http://gigapan.org/) are a Carnegie-Mellon U and NASA spinoff
working on two main thngs:
a robotic device that manages panorama-shooting with more-or-less any
digital camera
open source software for creating and displaying panoramas
They have just announced
Oh boy,
PC power supply self destructed on Thursday night. Acrid smell in the
room took me right back to my engineering days working on inverters for
implantable defibrilllators. Just managed to resurrect the PC this evening.
So, a PESO.
I like blue as well. I see that it could be more saturated and
contrasty, but I like it as shown. Almost a pastel. Very nice.
Paul
On Oct 5, 2007, at 11:55 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/4/2007 2:02:10 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Really three
Have you ever seen the original 'The Italian Job'? Right now I've got
this vision of you in my head and it's the character played by Benny
Hill called Professor Peach.
No, and I am afraid to search it out to look after your comments:-)
Walt
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Grace is going to be very pleased! I dragged this one to the desktop,
and I'm going to make her a small print. Grace, of course, is
frequently Belle. Nice shot.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6435180
On Oct 5, 2007, at 11:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Taken October, 2006 (you can
Will do, I want to see what the look for the small things proof is...
Cheers,
Norm
Bob Sullivan wrote:
Norm, Keep us posted on part III. Regards, Bob S.
On 10/5/07, Norm Baugher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Part two of the saga...
http://morris.blogs.nytimes.com/?themc=th
Norm
--
Ugh, I didn't mean that the way it sounded. Anyway, he loves the lens
and I think it's coming with us to Spain!
Amita
On 9/29/07, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 29/09/07, Amita Guha, discombobulated, unleashed:
Cotty sold my husband one of these. As I recall, it's sharp but very
flare-y.
All comments welcome.
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=238
K10D, DA 16~45, 100 ISO
Jack
Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get listings,
and more!
In a message dated 10/6/2007 5:06:30 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Grace is going to be very pleased! I dragged this one to the desktop,
and I'm going to make her a small print. Grace, of course, is
frequently Belle. Nice shot.
All comments gladly received.
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=239
K10D, FA 28~80 f/2.8, 100 ISO
Jack
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
On Oct 6, 2007, at 6:44 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=239
K10D, FA 28~80 f/2.8, 100 ISO
Hmm. This one doesn't do much for me. The rendering seems a little
bright and harsh.
Godfrey
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Oct 5, 2007, at 8:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Taken October, 2006 (you can see the pumpkins in the background).
...
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/beauty.htm
Fantastic! It has a wonderful, soaring complexity and a painterly
quality to it that are all at once focused by
Thanks, Godfrey, I tried that already (3 days) and did not work.
I'll try 1 or 2 weeks without the battery and see what happens.
Pedro Oliveira
Em Oct 5, 2007, às 12:37 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi escreveu:
Try taking the battery out and leaving it sit like that for two or
three days. It takes the
On Oct 6, 2007, at 4:30 AM, Derby Chang wrote:
http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/07_10/07_10_sundew/01.htm
I love simple compositions like this, Derby, but this one just
doesn't hold my eye. There's not quite enough to make it work, imo: I
have to consciously push myself to stop asking
Ach, it does sound like a fault. Oh well, a trip to service for it...
Godfrey
On Oct 6, 2007, at 7:29 AM, Pedro Oliveira wrote:
Thanks, Godfrey, I tried that already (3 days) and did not work.
I'll try 1 or 2 weeks without the battery and see what happens.
Pedro Oliveira
Em Oct 5, 2007,
It's the mood/mind set of the owners that intrigues me.
Thanks for commenting.
Jack
--- Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 6, 2007, at 6:44 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=239
K10D, FA 28~80 f/2.8, 100 ISO
Hmm. This one doesn't do
In a message dated 10/6/2007 7:34:25 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Oct 5, 2007, at 8:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Taken October, 2006 (you can see the pumpkins in the background).
...
http://members.aol.com/eactivist/PAWS/pages/beauty.htm
Fantastic! It has
In a message dated 10/6/2007 6:47:40 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All comments gladly received.
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=239
K10D, FA 28~80 f/2.8, 100 ISO
Jack
=
I see houses like that and wonder how I can shoot them so they
In a message dated 10/6/2007 6:25:02 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All comments welcome.
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=238
K10D, DA 16~45, 100 ISO
Jack
=
I have the same reaction to this one as the country porch. Not quite there.
In a message dated 10/6/2007 4:33:27 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Oh boy,
PC power supply self destructed on Thursday night. Acrid smell in the
room took me right back to my engineering days working on inverters for
implantable defibrilllators. Just managed to
Is the Oct gallery up yet and is it still linked at Mark Roberts web page
?..Thanks Joe
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
It seems that the October PUG still hasn't been posted. Patience is a
virtue...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is the Oct gallery up yet and is it still linked at Mark Roberts web page
?..Thanks Joe
--
Remember, it’s pillage then burn.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Thanks, Marnie. I have some other views to play with and may try it
again. ;)
Jack
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 6:47:40 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
All comments gladly received.
No, certainly not too much feedback. I'm only slightly lukewarm about
this one myself.
I do, however, like the contrast afforded by the shading. My only
negative is the fact that the stump is not a natural fall, but shows
the obvious use of a chain saw. Also, the oat shafts only hint at the
Now this is interesting. While looking for inspiration, or maybe
anti-inspiration I discovered the Pentax Challenge at DP review, sort
of an Ad Hoc PUG for non PDML members. Guess what the theme for October is?
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036message=25031906
[EMAIL
Took a few shots from my drive-by position. Shot a few as I slowly
moved along changing the perspective.
I didn't notice the gentlemen on the porch until I had taken 2 or 3. He
wanted to know if he could help me with something to which I replied,I
like your friendly looking house..I hope you
Just found this interesting, what do you guys think?
http://www.thestate.com/local/story/190126.html
rg2
--
the subject of a photograph is far less important than its composition
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from
I don't think the plantation or it's parent organization has a leg to
stand on, if they allow photography at all. They are however likely to
have deeper pockets than the photographer, which is probably the whole
point to the exercise.
Rebekah wrote:
Just found this interesting, what do you
I actually found the image in question. If the judge even lets this go
one day in court, he should be impeached, he doesn't deserve to be on
the bench deciding copyright cases.
P. J. Alling wrote:
I don't think the plantation or it's parent organization has a leg to
stand on, if they allow
Mr Ham had no right to do what he did. Private property rights should
always be respected especially when privacy is to be compromised by
being held up to the world to see.
Privacy and security are too closely related these days.
That being said, I'm somewhat ambivalent about being restricted from
Sorry Jack you can't copyright a work of nature. They can go after him
for trespass. Don't help the idiots any more than is necessary.
Jack Davis wrote:
Mr Ham had no right to do what he did. Private property rights should
always be respected especially when privacy is to be compromised by
This is just another shot of a California Turkey Vulture with the sun
lighting up its feathers.
I only slightly lightened the shadows and kind of prefer this version
for a couple reasons. Pretty heavily cropped. Same equipment.
This shot isn't one for which I have glorious plans..just is of
In this case, the trespass is the problem..what else?
Jack
--- P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry Jack you can't copyright a work of nature. They can go after
him
for trespass. Don't help the idiots any more than is necessary.
Jack Davis wrote:
Mr Ham had no right to do what he
As I was poking through the darker recesses of my computer, I found
this intriguing tidbit tucked away inside Picasa:
http://picasaweb.google.com/FarrAnthony/FYI/photo#5118286083288949490
or
http://tinyurl.com/2hcluf
Look about a third the way down the list. But perhaps it signifies nothing.
yeah, that's what I thought - they could get him for trespassing, but
I don't think he was doing anything illegal by taking a photograph.
What I don't understand is how you can place a legally binding
contract forbidding photographs of your land to be sold...do you have
to put up signs or
Yes, but they're suing him for copyright infringement. That's the
problem they're idiots, and if they can manage to get a court ot go
along with them in the interests of justice then it hurts us all. The
case as it stands should be thrown out and the proper legal action
taken. That is unless
Well, as to the legality, one does not have the right to sell images of someone
else's clearly identifiable property without their permission. One does have
the
right to take the photos, without violating any laws of trespass, it is selling
the images that is questionable. One would assume
It's a nice shot. But it's still a turkey vulture.
Jack Davis wrote:
This is just another shot of a California Turkey Vulture with the sun
lighting up its feathers.
I only slightly lightened the shadows and kind of prefer this version
for a couple reasons. Pretty heavily cropped. Same
The MZ-D aka KR-52 has for marketing reasons been renamed the K1D, at
least as far as I can tell. I don't think Pentax would let Google know
the specifications of a new camera ahead of time and keep that same
information from Adobe. (The odds are that a RAW file from a MZ-D will
never be seen
I believe you're wrong on that. You might be able to trademark the image
of something. Which will limit the use of images of it in some ways,In
fact the Colt Firearms Co. has trademarked the Blue Dome of their former
building, and no one else is allowed to use it in connection with gun
Copyright protected (against commercial image use) sights have been in
existence for quite awhile. I wouldn't be surprised if Mr Ham pays,
especially due to the trespass issue.
Without taking it any further, if it is the sight I am guessing it is,
it is one which is much used for commercial
As presented, it does little for me.
However, a rather severe crop starts to bring it alive ... It would
be a candidate to go back and shoot again.
I'll send you an idea of what I see...
Godfrey
On Oct 6, 2007, at 9:19 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
No, certainly not too much feedback. I'm only
On Oct 6, 2007, at 4:57 AM, Walter Hamler wrote:
Have you ever seen the original 'The Italian Job'? Right now I've got
this vision of you in my head and it's the character played by Benny
Hill called Professor Peach.
No, and I am afraid to search it out to look after your
comments
In some (or maybe many) cases the scenes are copyright protected
company logos and I suppose that could be at play.(?)
I've understood for some time that The Lone Cypress, on the Monterey
peninsula's 17 Mile Drive, is one such site.
Sometime in the late 90's I shot the scene, but it's not on my
A fairly large number of commercial buildings are copyrighted in such ways. You
can photograph them legally, but you can't sell the images without a property
release. That may well be the case here, but it sounds like the Plaintiffs did
not have their copyright actually filed.
-Adam
P. J.
K1, well rumors are... Based on which I went for K100D Super in
anticipation of whatever would be K1...
Just my 2¢.
--
new photos once and again... roman.blakout.net http://roman.blakout.net
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to
Adam Maas wrote:
A fairly large number of commercial buildings are copyrighted in such
ways. You can photograph them legally, but you can't sell the images
without a property release.
IIRC, you can't sell the images for commercial use without a release
but you can sell them as fine art
Nice shot is all I care about. It, also, has my permission to remain
a Turkey Vulture.
Thanks,
Jack
--- P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's a nice shot. But it's still a turkey vulture.
Jack Davis wrote:
This is just another shot of a California Turkey Vulture with the
sun
I showed this photo last year. Most liked it. Some liked it better in BW.
Taken in Napa on a sans Shel trip.
I started playing with it a few days after showing it. For some reason it
made me think of a quilt. I came back to it today and finished it up. Not
quite, quite what I want but
P. J. Alling wrote:
Now this is interesting. While looking for inspiration, or maybe
anti-inspiration I discovered the Pentax Challenge at DP review, sort
of an Ad Hoc PUG for non PDML members. Guess what the theme for October is?
Mark Roberts wrote:
Adam Maas wrote:
A fairly large number of commercial buildings are copyrighted in such
ways. You can photograph them legally, but you can't sell the images
without a property release.
IIRC, you can't sell the images for commercial use without a release
but you can
Bruce Dayton wrote:
One of my older shots.
Pentax PZ-1p, F 17-28/3.4-4.5 Fisheye
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0048-21.htm
Gorgeous colour. And an example of rules that are made to be broken.
Horizon line is just about through the centre. But the should wouldn't
work as well if it
At the end of the swimming lessons, the kids get to play a bit in the
water. Both of his teachers were playing with him in this one.
Pentax PZ-1p, FA* 200/2.8
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0194-06.htm
--
Bruce
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
David Savage wrote:
Warning: This is not a 100% smut free site (it's pretty tame smut
though :-), but the main images are quite interesting.
http://www.spynet.ru/2007/09/13/amerikansikie-soldaty-posle-vojjny-v.html
Anybody who starts a political slanging match is a Nazi (I hear by
declare
My youngest daughter a few years ago.
Pentax PZ-1p, FA* 85/1.4
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0230-17a.htm
--
Bruce
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
Thanks, Godfrey. As you now know, I received your re-crop idea and am
here providing the link to another version of the scene, the same one I
provided in response to your 'crop' email.
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=242
Jack
--- Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good one for the family album!
Jack
--- Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At the end of the swimming lessons, the kids get to play a bit in the
water. Both of his teachers were playing with him in this one.
Pentax PZ-1p, FA* 200/2.8
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0194-06.htm
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/3/2007 1:56:02 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It is really pretty good! I have never been able to capture fall
colors involving a larger number of trees - only small isolation
stuff. This is better than anything I
Like it very much. She is seriously cute!
Jack
--- Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My youngest daughter a few years ago.
Pentax PZ-1p, FA* 85/1.4
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0230-17a.htm
--
Bruce
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
It is not a copyright or trademark issue. It is a property rights issue. There
is nothing stopping you from taking a photo of my Blazer, but since with its
unique pattern of red primer, or a visible license plate it is clearly my
particular car, you can not sell photos of it without my
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Oct 6, 2007, at 4:30 AM, Derby Chang wrote:
http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc/07_10/07_10_sundew/01.htm
I love simple compositions like this, Derby, but this one just
doesn't hold my eye. There's not quite enough to make it work, imo: I
have to
Marnie, I'm offering this crop in response to your much appreciated
comments.
Probably my final offering.
Thanks.
Jack :)
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=243
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 6:47:40 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL
This is a very grey area. If your Blazer is parked in a public area when
the picture was taken, you have no standing to sue. If it was on private
property, things get murky (unless the photographer was also on the same
private property, at which point the question becomes one of straight
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v699/newtmaker/NotToeFood.jpg
This was the lonely Sandpiper that felt right at home yesterday.
Walt
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above
In a message dated 10/6/2007 2:45:47 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marnie, I'm offering this crop in response to your much appreciated
comments.
Probably my final offering.
Thanks.
Jack :)
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=243
=
Better.
In a message dated 10/6/2007 2:13:47 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks, Godfrey. As you now know, I received your re-crop idea and am
here providing the link to another version of the scene, the same one I
provided in response to your 'crop' email.
In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:03:07 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v699/newtmaker/NotToeFood.jpg
This was the lonely Sandpiper that felt right at home yesterday.
Walt
===
Hehehe. I rather like that. Cute little bird, too.
Thanks, Marnie. As I told Godfrey off list, this is my personal choice.
The one I posted earlier was my asking a question of the group.
Jack
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 2:13:47 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Thanks, Godfrey. As you now
You entirely miss the point. You cannot claim copyright on something you
hold no copyright to. If he pays it will be a miscarriage of justice and
in the end all photographers will pay and pay dearly.
Jack Davis wrote:
Copyright protected (against commercial image use) sights have been in
These scenes can be trademarked, not copyrighted a different thing all
together.
Jack Davis wrote:
In some (or maybe many) cases the scenes are copyright protected
company logos and I suppose that could be at play.(?)
I've understood for some time that The Lone Cypress, on the Monterey
Thanks, I did, however, sort of like the full house version that
included the rose bush and mail box. The guy in the camo pants didn't
add much. ;)
Jack
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 10/6/2007 2:45:47 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Marnie, I'm
NO NO. You are separating points and misapplying the logic.
As I said below Peter, and with all due respect, I think I've taken
this as far as I care to.
Jack
--- P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You entirely miss the point. You cannot claim copyright on something
you
hold no copyright
Appears he is looking hungrily at said toes. Cute shot and it gives me
another descriptive reference for tofu. gag
Jack
--- Walter Hamler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v699/newtmaker/NotToeFood.jpg
This was the lonely Sandpiper that felt right at home yesterday.
Tnat depends. Anything that's designed can be copyrighted(Buildings,
gardens, etc), but if it's essentially naturally occuring it can only be
trademarked.
-Adam
P. J. Alling wrote:
These scenes can be trademarked, not copyrighted a different thing all
together.
Jack Davis wrote:
In
This just so completely confuses copyright and trademark infringement
with a bit of the we can control everything cant the Dixie Plantation
has for the basis of their suit that it's just scary. It seems we
photographers are already paying for this.
graywolf wrote:
Well, as to the legality,
On a hayride at the pumpkin farm today with some friends.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6501260
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6501261
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the
Meandering through some older work, I found this fairly classical
study and thought it was worth posting ... :-)
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/41c.htm
Comments and critique always appreciated.
enjoy
Godfrey
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Maybe but you are using logic starting from incorrect assumptions, I am
stating law, two different things. A work of nature cannot be
copyrighted period. The photograph in question is of a group of 250+
year old oak trees. They stopped being a work of man a long time ago, if
they ever were. No
Hi Jack
You've pretty much summed up my feelings about the image. I love the colour of
the grasses and the texture of the stump but the obvious saw cuts detract from
it.
The more severe crop of the second attempt is much better.
Cheers
Brian
++
Brian
Sure and I'm not allowed to make a copy of your building, without paying
royalties, but photographing your building is not making a copy of it.
More importantly the image in question appears to be of entirely natural
origin. Unless someone can prove the road was laid out by a surveyor and
not
The close cropping makes it for me. The only quibble is that I find the
sapling in the background just above the broken spoke just slightly
distracting. It does, however, give continuity to that spoke and I'm not
entirely sure whether it improves or detracts from the image.
A minor issue
Thanks, Brian! Me too.
Jack
--- Brian Walters [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Jack
You've pretty much summed up my feelings about the image. I love the
colour of the grasses and the texture of the stump but the obvious
saw cuts detract from it.
The more severe crop of the second attempt is
Paul,
First shot has a couple problems (background post) and, of course, some
movement blur. The blur, however, can be a part of the message when it
comes to children.
Grace looks extra cute in a pony tail. I happily remember the time when
my daughters reached an age where such joyful events would
Classical is often used in place of Cliche.
Debris in back of the wheel detracts.
Texture does suit the image.
Jack
--- Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Meandering through some older work, I found this fairly classical
study and thought it was worth posting ... :-)
While nicely exposed focused, this one doesn't do anything for me.
Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PESO: Country Porch
All comments gladly received.
http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=239
Well, the oats are set off from the stump nicely, but the stump just
doesn't seem like it fits. So doesn't quite do it for me.
--
Bruce
Saturday, October 6, 2007, 6:24:49 AM, you wrote:
JD All comments welcome.
JD http://photolightimages.com/aspupload/detail.asp?ID=238
JD K10D, DA 16~45,
Light is the big issue here for me. It is very bright and harsh. The
actual porch looks to have some very interesting things to look at
but, you'd need to improve the light to get a really good shot.
--
Bruce
Saturday, October 6, 2007, 6:44:02 AM, you wrote:
JD All comments gladly received.
Nice subject light but I think the composition would be improved by doing
a vertical crop from the top down to the top most part of the stump on the
LH side.
Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: Jack Davis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PESO: Wild Oats
In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:58:41 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On a hayride at the pumpkin farm today with some friends.
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6501260
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6501261
==
They both seem blurry and that
Pretty interesting as an abstract. The all green is kind of cool. I
wish there was a tiny bit more DOF to show up the stem coming from the
lower left corner. Overall, I like it.
--
Bruce
Saturday, October 6, 2007, 4:30:18 AM, you wrote:
DC Oh boy,
DC PC power supply self destructed on
Very nice. Reminds me of one I've seen here before.
Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PESO 2007 - 41c - GDG
Meandering through some older work, I found this fairly classical
study and thought it was
You're right it isn't a copyright or trademark issue, it is a property
rights/trespass issue, however the lawyers for the Plantation decided to
sue the photographer for copyright infringement, for which they clearly
have no standing.
Since you haven't seen the pictures I'll keep this simple,
I like the angle and composition of the first shot better.
--
Bruce
Saturday, October 6, 2007, 9:52:49 AM, you wrote:
JD Took a few shots from my drive-by position. Shot a few as I slowly
JD moved along changing the perspective.
JD I didn't notice the gentlemen on the porch until I had
There is something to be seen in the feathers that are lit up, but I'd
still like to see the head clearly. I suspect you need some pretty
serious equipment to really do it justice.
--
Bruce
Saturday, October 6, 2007, 11:14:36 AM, you wrote:
JD This is just another shot of a California Turkey
I thought it was one Godfry posted before.
Kenneth Waller wrote:
Very nice. Reminds me of one I've seen here before.
Kenneth Waller
http://tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: PESO 2007 - 41c - GDG
Meandering through
In a message dated 10/6/2007 3:59:44 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Meandering through some older work, I found this fairly classical
study and thought it was worth posting ... :-)
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/41c.htm
Comments and critique always
In a message dated 10/6/2007 1:52:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My youngest daughter a few years ago.
Pentax PZ-1p, FA* 85/1.4
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/0230-17a.htm
--
Bruce
Looks like she's always been seriously cute. :-) Nice shot, has a
Well, that improves things quite a bit. Now the stump doesn't look so
out of place - it provides a nice backdrop. This crop changes it for
me to something I like.
--
Bruce
Saturday, October 6, 2007, 2:10:54 PM, you wrote:
JD Thanks, Godfrey. As you now know, I received your re-crop idea and
1 - 100 of 126 matches
Mail list logo
