From: Tim Bray
Well... Interesting to know what the pros consider ?realistic to be?.
In particular, I was fairly shocked that they were OK with HDR. -T
Your eye can see shadow detail and highlights at the same time, and
minimal HDR can reproduce this. The way I read it, they're only "OK wi
It's worth reading if you *are* submitting shots to NatGeo. It tells you
what the editors will accept and what they won't.
From: Bruce Walker
To what end? If I were submitting shots to NatGeo then maybe, but I'm
not so I see nothing worth reading there.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Tim Br
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Tim Bray wrote:
> Worth reading: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/your-shot/manipulation
>
I have 4 words in response to all of that: Great Pyramids of Giza.
-Adam
--
http://www.mountainfort.com/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.ne
Hi!
Sorry, I'm a bit late to this discussion... And I'm not in any way
professional photographer or even "experienced in art", but that list
of requirements surprised me a lot.
I fully agree with Tom's comments, echoes my thoughts... especially
couple of things:
- Hand-tinting requirement to be an
Quite an honor, Mark. Your crop is obviously much better.
Paul
On Jun 1, 2012, at 11:29 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
> Mark the both look fine - I dont understand their crop, either, tho...
>
> way to go!
>
> ann
>
> On 6/1/2012 22:44, Mark C wrote:
>> On 6/1/2012 2:28 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
>>> I
Mark the both look fine - I dont understand their crop, either, tho...
way to go!
ann
On 6/1/2012 22:44, Mark C wrote:
On 6/1/2012 2:28 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
If most of us are honest with ourselves, we'd have to admit that we'd
be delighted if an image of ours was "discovered" or requested b
On 6/1/2012 2:28 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
If most of us are honest with ourselves, we'd have to admit that we'd
be delighted if an image of ours was "discovered" or requested by
National Geographic magazine. You may think it will never happen, but
it is happening right now with some of my son-in-la
Wasn't Getty refusing images not taken with high end Nikon or high end Canon?
That seems more absurd to me. Disqualifying by brand?
Sent from my iPad
Jeffery L. Smith
New Orleans, Louisiana
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSC
Well I'm glad to have seen it --
On a wing and a prayer - I hopped right in and submitted my red flamingo
funny thing though, I couldnt find the button to log out after I did the
my shot thing.
Yeah, the admonishments were , perhaps, a bit heavy handed and um not
as nicely written as they migh
> Not sure why the strong negative reactions on this. It should really
> come as no surprise to anyone that different "outlets" have different
> standards for what they want or will accept for publication.
>
> Photojournalistic places will want as much realism as possible and
> photographers who sh
Alright, now *that's* interesting. I admit not going over that list
closely to the very bottom, so I missed "HDR: ok". I too am surprised
at that, but I guess it's a nod to current fashion. Or perhaps they
are using the steak test: HDR is okay as long as it's rare or medium
rare. If it's medium to
Heh. I can't win: when I respond at great length to a question, it's
suggested I could have answered in two sentences. When I answer in two
sentences ... well now I'm going to have to respond at length.
Usually we post an opinion, something newsworthy, a picture, or a
pointer to somebody else's op
Well... Interesting to know what the pros consider “realistic to be”.
In particular, I was fairly shocked that they were OK with HDR. -T
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
> To what end? If I were submitting shots to NatGeo then maybe, but I'm
> not so I see nothing worth rea
On 01/06/2012 12:01 PM, Bruce Walker wrote:
To what end? If I were submitting shots to NatGeo then maybe, but I'm
not so I see nothing worth reading there.
New PDML Rule:
No more submitting anything to the list without vetting it past Bruce first.
--
William Robb
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
Not sure why the strong negative reactions on this. It should really
come as no surprise to anyone that different "outlets" have different
standards for what they want or will accept for publication.
Photojournalistic places will want as much realism as possible and
photographers who shoot for AP
> Worth reading: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/your-shot/manipulation
Verbal vomit.
Tom C.
--
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.
To what end? If I were submitting shots to NatGeo then maybe, but I'm
not so I see nothing worth reading there.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Tim Bray wrote:
>
> Worth reading: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/your-shot/manipulation
--
-bmw
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
ht
Worth reading: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/your-shot/manipulation
--
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.
18 matches
Mail list logo
